Clinical Research Regulation For Malawi and United Kingdom

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Overview

In accordance with the PMRAAct, the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA) is responsible for reviewing and approving clinical trial applications for new drugs, generic drugs, and imported drugs to be registered in Malawi. The PMRA has replaced the Pharmacy, Medicines and Poisons Board (PMPB).

The R-HlthResCoord indicates that before submitting a clinical trial application to the PMRA, the sponsor or principal investigator (PI) must obtain full ethical approval from either of the two (2) National Commission for Science and Technology (NCST)-approved ethics committees (ECs)—the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) or the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC). Parallel submissions of a clinical trial application to an EC and the PMRA are prohibited.

As per the SciTechOrder, an NCST-issued license is required for research activities involving humans; research involving clinical trials; and research activities of multicentered research. The SciTechOrder does not specify whether the process of obtaining an NCST-issued license is separate from the NHSRC and COMREC approvals. See the Scope of Review section for information on NHSRC and COMREC approvals of the aforementioned research activities.

Clinical Trial Review Process

According to MWI-50, the PMRA receives clinical trial applications through the office of the Director General, and the applicant must submit evidence of ethical clearance from either the NHSRC or COMREC.

Per MWI-34, the guidance in the G-CTARevVacBiol and the G-CTAProcsVacBiol also apply to clinical trials of drugs. The G-CTARevVacBiol and the G-CTAProcsVacBiol indicate that upon receipt of a clinical trial application, the PMRA initially screens the application for completeness and assigns a PMRA reference number to the application. According to the G-CTARevVacBiol, the result of the screening will be communicated, and the screening form will be forwarded by fax, to the applicant. The applicant will forward any outstanding documents to the PMRA. The PMRA’s technical staff then reviews the application or may forward it to an expert, or to an evaluator for scientific review.

The G-CTAProcsVacBiol specifies that the application is evaluated by three (3) PMRA-appointed expert clinical trial reviewers who will provide a written report to the designated registration office, also known as the “Focal Point” division. The Focal Point will then collate and present the expert reviews to the PMRA Clinical Trial Review Committee (CTRC). The CTRC then reviews all the available documentation and provides a recommendation for approval or rejection. The PMRA considers the CTRC’s recommendation and issues a written approval or rejection.

MWI-50 further specifies that the PMRA may grant full or conditional approval depending on the nature of the CTRC’s findings. Depending on the study’s risk profile, the PMRA may conduct post-authorization good clinical practice (GCP) inspections for select clinical trials. Per the G-CTARevVacBiol, if the application is neither approved nor rejected, the PMRA’s technical staff will communicate its recommendation to the applicant. The response from the applicant will be considered at the PMRA’s subsequent scheduled meeting, and the subsequent decision will be communicated to the applicant. If changes must be made to the protocol, investigator’s brochure, or any other document, the amended document should be submitted with the applicant’s response.

The G-CTAProcsVacBiol states that the applicant may appeal a rejection decision, providing additional information, or amending the application to meet the PMRA’s requirements. The appeal will be referred to the CTRC for a final recommendation to the PMRA.

Per MWI-61, the PMRA may conduct GCP inspections during ongoing clinical trials to provide real-time assessment of the investigator’s conduct of the trial and protection of participants. Clinical trial sites may be inspected before regulatory approval, while the trial is ongoing, when participants are being enrolled in a trial, on a routine basis, when triggered by a complaint, or if there is a suspicion of serious non-compliance integrity issues and/or scientific/ethical misconduct. See MWI-61 for more information.

(See the Submission Process and Timeline of Review sections for details on the administrative and technical processing and review timelines. See also the G-CTARevVacBiol and the G-CTAProcsVacBiol for more information on the PMRA’s review procedures.)

1-6

2 and 3

Part II (Sections 4-5) and Part XIII (Section 131)

2.0 and 8.0-8.3

Last content review/update: January 21, 2025

New Info (Not Yet in Profile)

On April 10, 2025, the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) (Amendment) Regulations 2024 was signed into law. There is a 12-month implementation period before the amended regulations come fully into force on April 10, 2026. For more information, see the Health Research Authority news update.

Overview

In accordance with the MHCTR and the MHCTR2006, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is responsible for reviewing, evaluating, and approving applications for clinical trials using registered or unregistered investigational products (IPs). (Note: IPs are known as investigational medicinal products (IMPs) in the United Kingdom (UK)). The G-CTApp specifies that the scope of the MHRA’s assessment includes all clinical trials (Phases 1-4). Per G-CTApp and G-IRASCombRev, all new clinical trial applications must be prepared, submitted, and reviewed via the combined review process, which offers a single application route and parallel/coordinated review from MHRA and the ethics committee (EC) leading to a single UK decision for clinical trials.

Regarding licensing of biosimilars (i.e., generic biotech medicines), see the G-Biosimilars for details on the UK’s recent regulatory changes to ease or remove clinical trial requirements for the MHRA’s review and approval of biosimilars.

Clinical Trial Review Process

Per GBR-72, under combined review, research teams make a single application using a new part (GBR-125) of the Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) (GBR-78), which goes to both the MHRA and an EC at the same time. The regulatory and ethics reviews are done in parallel and any requests for further information are raised jointly. A single response to these requests leads to a single decision from both reviews. The G-CTApp states that the initial combined review assessment will be completed within 30 days of application submission. Applications for healthy volunteer trials and sponsor-determined phase 1 trials in non-oncology participants may qualify for a shortened assessment time and the MHRA will work with the EC to expedite these applications. When applications need expert advice, the MHRA will seek advice from the Clinical Trials, Biologicals and Vaccines Expert Advisory Group (CTBV EAG) of the Commission on Human Medicines (CHM). In addition, the CHM will then discuss the trial at their meeting, which will take place later in the same week as the CTBV EAG meeting. See the G-CTApp for examples of which trials require expert advice and for detailed requirements. The MHRA also supports the conduct of trials with complex innovative designs such as umbrella, basket, platform, and master protocol plus submodules. These trial designs are characterized by the presence of prospective major adaptations, such as the addition of new IPs or introducing new trial populations. Before submitting a clinical trial application with a complex innovative design and/or an amendment requesting approval of major adaptations, sponsors are recommended to establish a dialogue with the MHRA and seek advice.

The G-CTApp states that under the combined review process, the MHRA will inform applicants of the outcome of the submission along with the EC’s review and decision. The outcomes could be one (1) of the following:

Acceptance of the request for a clinical trial authorization
Acceptance of the request for a clinical trial authorization subject to conditions
Grounds for non-acceptance of the request for a clinical trial authorization

As indicated in the G-CTApp, with respect to grounds for non-acceptance, applicants will have the opportunity to respond, usually within 14 days; however, this may be extended on request. A communication informing the applicant of the combined MHRA and EC decision will usually be sent within 60 days of receiving the original valid application. If an extension to the response date has been agreed to, then this will impact the final decision timeline. Notification of a decision relating to a gene therapy product, somatic cell therapy (including xenogenic cell therapy) product, tissue engineered product, or products containing genetically modified organisms will be sent within 90 days of receiving the original application, unless otherwise advised. Communications will be sent electronically via email from MHRA_CT_Ecomms@mhra.gov.uk. The MHRA will only send official correspondence to the named applicant email address. According to the MHCTR, if the sponsor or the designated representative does not receive a request for additional information from the MHRA within 30 days, the application is considered authorized. (See the Timeline of Review section for additional details.)

Per GBR-9, the EC’s ethical opinion applies for the duration of the study, which was stated in the clinical trial application and protocol. An extension of the study period is not in itself a substantial amendment, except where it is related to other amendments that would be substantial, such as an increase in target recruitment, addition of new procedures or sub-studies, or extension of follow-up. Where the duration of the study is to be extended beyond the period specified in the application form, the EC should be notified.

IRAS (GBR-78) is a single system for applying for the permissions and approvals for health and social care/community care research in the UK. It generates the IRAS ID and uses filters to ensure that the data collected and collated is appropriate to the type of study, and consequently the permissions and approvals required. The system helps applicants meet the regulatory and governance requirements. As described in GBR-67, approval from the Health Research Authority (HRA) is required for all National Health Service (NHS) project-based research led from England or Wales. HRA and Health and Care Research Wales (HCRW) approval brings together the assessment of governance and legal compliance. For any new studies led from Scotland or Northern Ireland but have English and/or Welsh NHS sites, the national research and development coordinating function of the lead nation will share information with the HRA and HCRW assessment teams, who can issue HRA and HCRW approval for English and Welsh sites and thereby retain existing compatibility arrangements. Studies led from England or Wales with sites in Northern Ireland or Scotland will be supported through existing UK-wide compatibility systems, by which each country accepts the centralized assurances, as far as they apply, from national coordinating functions without unnecessary duplication. For details on HRA’s assessment criteria and standards for approval, see GBR-29.

UK-wide Research

The UKwide-Rsrch specifies that the four (4) UK nations take a consistent approach to study-wide reviews with one (1) application for all relevant UK sites. Each UK nation will take assurances from the study-wide review conducted by the lead nation (the nation conducting the initial review). The following outlines key differences in approvals from UK nations:

England and Wales – For any research taking place in England and/or Wales, the sponsor will receive an HRA and HCRW approval letter, which will detail any further requirements before beginning the research
Northern Ireland – Each participating Northern Ireland Health and Social Care body will confirm their capacity and capability after the relevant study-wide reviews and participating site assessments and arrangements are complete
Scotland – For any research taking place in Scotland, the sponsor will receive Research & Development permission after the relevant study-wide reviews and site assessments and arrangements are complete

Notification Scheme

Per the G-CTApp, MHRA’s notification scheme enables a more streamlined and risk-proportionate approach to processing clinical trial authorization for “initial” applications. The scheme only applies to clinical trial applications for Phase 4 and certain Phase 3 clinical trials deemed to be of lower risk. Interest in the notification scheme should be registered via the combined review process described above (GBR-125). MHRA acceptance of an application under the notification scheme will be confirmed within 14 calendar days from the application received effective date and authorization by the MHRA will be granted unless any criterion is not suitably met. If the MHRA determines the application does not meet the notification scheme criteria, an objection decision will be communicated within 14 calendar days from the application received effective date, and the application will continue under full clinical trial assessment with a decision communicated within the 30-day statutory timeframe.

As indicated in the G-CTApp, the notification scheme acceptance criteria are as follows:

Phase 4 trials must meet both of the following criteria:

All IPs are licensed and used according to the relevant UK, United States of America (USA), or European Union (EU) marketing authorization (except for placebo)
There are no ongoing safety concerns with the IP(s) that the sponsor is aware of, for example other trials on temporary halt/clinical hold, other trials with unresolved urgent safety measures or post-marketing regulatory restrictions

Phase 3 trials must meet at least one (1) of the following criteria:

The trial is already approved in the USA or EU based on the same protocol and Investigator’s Brochure (IB) versions submitted to MHRA, and for EU approvals, the same version of the IP dossier. For trials approved in the USA only, the IP dossier submitted to the MHRA must document the same IP manufacturing process
The MHRA has approved in the last two (2) years a previous Phase 3 clinical trial of the IP(s) at the same dose (or a higher dose), dosing frequency (or a higher frequency) and route of administration, and for the same indication (even if the trial was with a different sponsor) and utilizing the same manufacturing process
IPs are licensed and used according to the relevant UK, USA, or EU marketing authorization (except for placebo)

In addition, the G-CTApp states that to be eligible for the scheme, a Phase 3 trial must not include any of the following:

Complex, innovative trial design (e.g., basket, umbrella, and platform) that allows for prospective major adaptations such as the addition of indications or IPs via future amendments
Includes pediatric participants
Includes pregnant or breastfeeding participants
IP is first in class
IP is an advanced therapy medicinal product (ATMP)

Brexit Background

Per the G-MHRASubmiss, Brexit, the EUCouncil-Brexit, the WithdrlAgrmt, and the G-AfterTransition, the UK withdrew from the EU on January 31, 2020. The MHRA updated and published clinical trials guidance that became effective on January 1, 2021. G-AfterTransition summarizes the guidance to sponsors and researchers. Furthermore, the G-MHRASubmiss describes how to make certain regulatory submissions to the MHRA (substantial amendments, end-of-trial notifications, and developmental safety update reports (DSURs)). Per the MHCTR-EUExit and as explained in GBR-115, the new guidance went into force via the MHCTR-EUExit (also known as the “Exit Regulations”). The Exit Regulations also update existing UK legislation by, for example, replacing references to EU databases with newly established UK databases. The G-IPsNIreland delineates that the supply and use of IPs in Northern Ireland must follow EU laws as per the Northern Ireland Protocol. For policy papers and details on the Northern Ireland Protocol, see GBR-119. For broader information and a comprehensive Brexit “checker” of new rules in the UK, see GBR-60.

To help ensure the continuity of supply of IPs for clinical trials the BrexitLtr-IPs indicates that the UK will unilaterally recognize certain EU regulatory processes for a time-limited period. This recognition is known as “standstill.”

GBR-115 indicates that the UK is committed to being as aligned as possible with the EU Clinical Trials Regulation (GBR-21). The MMDAct grants authority for regulations to be made that correspond or are similar to GBR-21. For more information about GBR-21, see GBR-54.

6

10.9

Help (Preparing and Submitting Applications)

When a clinical trial authorization (CTA) is needed, Trial Sponsor and legal Representative, Registration of your clinical trial, Combined review of clinical trials of investigational medicinal products, Documents to send with your application, Assessment of your submission, New notification scheme, Requesting approval of trials with complex innovative designs, and Applications that need expert advice

Part 4 (Article 126)

Part 2 (Chapter 1)

Introduction and Article 1

Amendment of Regulation 12 of the Principal Regulations; and Part 2 (Conditions Based on Article 3 of the Directive)

Part 1 (2), Part 2 (5, 6, and 7), Part 3 (12, 14, 15, 17, and 18), and Schedule 2

Approvals for project-based research in the National Health Service (NHS) and Northern Ireland’s Health and Social Care (HSC) Service

Regulatory Fees

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority

According to the PMRAAct, a person who intends to conduct a clinical trial must apply to the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA) for a clinical trial certificate upon payment of the prescribed fee.

Per the PMRAFeesRegs, the following fees apply to clinical trials:

Application, review, and registration: 5% of total budget
Annual renewal: $2,200 USD
Amendments: $300 USD

As delineated in the PMRAFeesRegs, a fee equaling 6% of the total invoice value must also be paid for the importation of unregistered medicines or allied substances from authorized sources. The G-ImpExpMP further indicates that this fee is subject to change from time to time.

Payment Instructions

No information is available regarding payment instructions.

National Commission for Science and Technology

No information is available regarding fees for the National Commission for Science and Technology (NCST).

Part VII (Section 75)

10 and 11

3.3

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency

As per the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, and the G-CTApp, the sponsor or the designated representative is responsible for paying a fee to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to submit a clinical trial application for authorization. According to the G-MHRAPaymt, applicants will receive an invoice to make a payment for the outstanding amount after validation of the application. Applicants must pay invoices upon receipt or they will incur penalty fees. Non-payment may also result in suspension of any license or authorization, followed by legal proceedings for any unpaid amounts.

As delineated in the G-MHRAFees, the MHRA levies the following clinical trial processing fees:

3,366 British Pounds – Applications with an Investigational Medicinal Product (IMP) dossier (higher fee for phase 1, full and simplified IMP dossier)
248 British Pounds – Applications without an IMP dossier (lower fee for phase IV, cross referral, additional protocol)
248 British Pounds – Clinical trial variation/amendment
No cost – Phase 4 notification
248 British Pounds – Assessment of annual safety reports

Note per the G-MHRAFees, there is no annual clinical trials fee and no fee for Phase IV notifications. For a cross-referral or additional protocol submission, no new IMP dossier or investigators brochure data should be provided; however, copies of the relevant manufacturer’s authorization(s) and qualified person declaration (if applicable) should be provided since these are study specific.

Per the G-CTAuth-GBR, the fees for the annual safety reports are applicable to annual progress reports and Development Safety Update Reports (DSURs). From June 1, 2024, MHRA will only accept online payment of this fee via MHRA’s payments service (GBR-26) prior to submission of an annual safety report. Receipts generated will be sent by email and must be included in the report submission as proof of payment. Failure to provide evidence of payment will result in the submission being made invalid.

The G-CTApp further indicates that no fees are required for applications submitted and authorized under the Notification Scheme.

Payment Instructions

According to the G-MHRAPaymt, the MHRA does not accept checks. Payments can be made electronically by bank transfer, credit card, or debit card. The relevant invoice and customer number should be quoted when making payments. Bank transfers should be sent to:

Account Name: MHRA
Account Number: 10004386
Sort code: 60-70-80
Swift code: NWBKGB2L
IBAN: GB68NWBK60708010004386
Bank: National Westminster Bank

Bank address:
National Westminster Bank RBS
London Corporate Service Centre, 2^nd Floor
280 Bishopsgate
London
EC2M 4RB
UK

As per G-MHRAPaymt, credit or debit card payments may be made securely online using GBR-26. Remittance advice notices can be sent to sales.invoices@mhra.gov.uk and should include the relevant invoice number on the remittance advice. MHRA cannot accept any documentation sent by postal mail service. Further information can be obtained by emailing sales.invoices@mhra.gov.uk. G-MHRAPaymt further provides that clinical trial application invoice disputes/queries should be emailed to ctdhelpline@mhra.gov.uk and cc: sales.invoices@mhra.gov.uk.

The G-CTApp indicates that invoices for clinical trial authorization applications and substantial amendment applications are sent directly to the applicant shortly after a valid submission has been established. The applicant’s cover letter should clearly highlight the purchase order (PO) number where available. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure timely payment of invoices for their submissions. Invoices must be settled on receipt of invoice. For additional information, applicants may contact the MHRA Finance Department at 020 3080 6533 or sales.invoices@mhra.gov.uk.

Fees

Development Safety Update Reports (DSURs)

8. Clinical trials - application fees

11, 13, and Explanatory Note

Part 3 (17)

Ethics Committee

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Overview

Malawi has a centralized registration process for ethics committees (ECs) and EC review. As mandated by the SciTechAct, the National Commission for Science and Technology (NCST) is the governmental body responsible for EC oversight, and for the promotion and coordination of research in Malawi.

As per the G-NHSRC, the G-COMREC, MWI-5, and MWI-50, the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) and the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC) are the two (2) NCST-approved ECs responsible for monitoring and evaluating health research studies involving humans. The G-HlthResConduct and the R-HlthResCoord indicate that COMREC, as a subsidiary of the NHSRC, only reviews and approves studies involving or originating from College of Medicine (COM) or Kamuzu College of Nursing (KCN) (now known collectively as the Kamuzu University of Health Sciences (KUHeS), per MWI-62) faculty members and students, and their collaborators/coinvestigators/affiliates. The NHSRC has the sole jurisdiction to review studies with a national interest and multicenter studies, including those from COM and KCN, as well as studies from all other researchers and institutions. Per the R-HlthResCoord, each EC has members representing the other committee in order to facilitate the transfer of information between the ECs. The NHSRC and COMREC report to and are centrally monitored by the NCST.

MWI-25 indicates that as of August 2024, COMREC is operating under KUHeS and will be changing its name to Kamuzu University of Health Sciences Research Committee (KUREC), following approval from the NCST. The COMREC guidance and forms provided in the Malawi profile are still being used.

Ethics Committee Composition

National Health Sciences Research Committee

As per the G-NHSRC, NHSRC must consist of members with varying backgrounds, including the social sciences, to promote complete and adequate research proposal review. The committee should include one (1) lay person, as well as members from the following organizations:

National Research Council of Malawi (one (1) member)
Ministry of Health (MOH) headquarters (two (2) members)
COMREC (two (2) members)
Community Health Sciences Unit (one (1) member)
National AIDS Commission (one (1) member)
Center for Social Research (one (1) member)
Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital (one (1) member)
Zomba Central Hospital (one (1) member)
Lilongwe Central Hospital (one (1) member)
Christian Health Association of Malawi (one (1) member)
Mzuzu University (one (1) member)
Mzuzu Central Hospital (one (1) member)
Nurses and Midwives Council of Malawi (one (1) member)
Ministry of Justice (one (1) member)

The members elect the chairperson and the vice-chairperson.

College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee

The G-COMREC specifies that COMREC should be multidisciplinary, and its members must have the basic qualifications, experience, and expertise to conduct fair scientific and ethical proposal reviews. The committee must have a maximum membership of 15, and include representatives from the biomedical sciences, research methods, behavioral science, and research ethics areas. Additionally, there must also be representatives from the NCST, the NHSRC, the KCN, and the lay community.

Furthermore, the committee must be diverse, have balanced gender representation, and embody community interests and concerns. Members are also required to sign a confidentiality agreement and refuse projects in which they have a conflict of interest. Members from the COM staff serving on the committee must be a minimum grade of senior lecturer, and preferably have peer reviewed publications.

See the G-NHSRC and the G-COMREC for additional EC membership criteria and qualification requirements.

Terms of Reference, Review Procedures, and Meeting Schedule

National Health Sciences Research Committee

The G-NHSRC states that the MOH’s Research Unit serves as a secretariat for NHSRC, and is responsible for preparing materials and meeting logistics. Research proposals must be distributed to NHSRC members two (2) weeks before the scheduled meetings to allow members time to adequately review the submitted proposals. Half of the NHSRC’s membership constitutes a quorum of any meeting, and the meeting is rescheduled within the following two (2) weeks if a quorum is not reached. Half of the ordinary quorum forms a quorum for the rescheduled meeting if no ordinary quorum is reached. Otherwise, the meeting must be rescheduled.

As delineated by the G-NHSRC, NHSRC decisions are reached by consensus. If there is no consensus, a decision is made by simple majority of members present through an open ballot. In the event of a tie, the chairperson casts a vote.

According to the G-NHSRC, when new NHSRC members have been appointed, they may attend the first one (1) or two (2) meetings as an observer in order to learn about the workings of the NHSRC before being assigned reviewer responsibility. Such members will undergo NHSRC orientation sessions covering guidelines and standard operating procedures (SOPs) of the committee and any practical matters with the secretariat and chairperson. Continuing education for all members in matters of health research ethics and related disciplines in human research protections is also essential, and the chairperson is responsible for fostering local and international networks, links, and partnerships for the purposes of continuing the NHSRC’s education and development.

Per the G-NHSRC, NHSRC members must serve on the committee for three (3) years and are required to renew their appointments if requested by their organizations. The G-NHSRC and the G-HlthResConduct also indicate that the NHSRC meets once every two (2) months.

College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee

COMREC requires written SOPs to be maintained, and all relevant records (e.g., SOPs, reports, curriculum vitaes (CVs), meeting minutes, and correspondence) to be archived for three (3) years following the study’s completion, as delineated in the G-COMREC. The COMREC secretariat must compile all the relevant documents and materials required for review of a proposal and circulate them to the members at least 14 days before the date of the scheduled meeting. Quorum of any meeting is achieved when a majority of the members attend. The quorum should preferably include members of both genders, a member whose primary area of expertise is in a non-scientific area, and at least one (1) member who is independent of the COM. If the quorum cannot be achieved, the meeting must be rescheduled within two (2) weeks of the failed meeting. If the subsequent meeting does not achieve quorum, then the chairperson must make a decision based on the expertise and number of members present.

The G-COMREC further states that COMREC’s final decision will be reached through a consensus. If there is no consensus, a decision is made through a majority vote.

Per the G-COMREC, COMREC members must receive initial and continuing training regarding the ethics and science of research. The appointment of committee members is valid for three (3) years, and a member may be reappointed to serve another three (3) year term. According to the G-COMREC and the G-HlthResConduct, COMREC meets every month.

1.0, 2.0, 3.1-3.3, 4.0, 5.7-5.8, and 8.0

1 and 7

1.0, 3.1-3.3, and 4.0

Part IV

2.0 and 8.0

Last content review/update: January 21, 2025

Overview

As set forth in GAfREC, the United Kingdom (UK) has a centralized recognition process for ethics committees (ECs), known as research ethics committees (RECs) in the UK. ECs are part of an accountable and independent Research Ethics Service (RES) (GBR-62).

As described in GBR-51 and GBR-62, the RES has a dual mission to protect the rights, safety, dignity, and well-being of research participants and to facilitate and promote ethical research that is of potential benefit to participants, science, and society. To achieve this, GBR-62 states that the RES works with the devolved administrations to conduct the following activities:

Provide robust, proportionate, and responsive ethical review of research through ECs
Provide ethical guidance to ECs
Provide and deliver a managed structure to support ECs
Deliver a quality assurance (QA) framework
Deliver a training program
Work with colleagues across the UK to maintain a UK-wide framework for ethical review
Work with colleagues in the wider regulatory environment to streamline the processes for approving research
Promote and support transparency in research

As stated in GAfREC, the RES encompasses England’s Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), Northern Ireland’s Department of Health, the Scottish Government Health and Social Care, Finance, Digital and Governance Directorates, the Welsh Government’s Department of Health and Social Care as well as the ECs that are collectively recognized or established by these authorizing bodies. The UK Health Departments have authorized the head office of the RES in England, within the Health Research Authority (HRA), to perform some UK-wide functions on behalf of the other head offices, including performing some of the functions of the UK Ethics Committee Authority (UKECA), which is the statutory body that recognizes ECs for the review of clinical trials of investigational medicinal products (CTIMPs). (See Oversight of Ethics Committees section for more details on RES and UKECA functions.) In accordance with the MHCTR and the MHCTR2006, ECs recognized to conduct reviews of clinical trials for CTIMPs are authorized by the UKECA. The UKwide-Rsrch reaffirms that GAfREC is the UK policy document governing the RES function and EC reviews in each country.

All recognized RES ECs are required to comply with the provisions delineated in GAfREC, the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), and GBR-9. However, specific ECs within the RES are recognized, or otherwise designated, to review certain types of research proposals. A list of recognized ECs within the RES is available through GBR-111. Also see GBR-64 for EC definitions.

Ethics Committee Composition

As delineated in the MHCTR and GAfREC, a RES-recognized EC, which includes those recognized by UKECA, may consist of up to 18 members. Collectively, members must encompass the qualifications and experience required to review and evaluate the scientific, medical, and ethical aspects of a proposed clinical trial. The ECs should include a diverse mixture of members in terms of age, disability, gender, race, religion, and sexual orientation. One third of the committee must also be lay members, and half of the lay members must be persons who are not and never have been health care professionals, clinical researchers, or managers of clinical research (also known as lay members). Additionally, GAfREC states that a quorate meeting must be attended by at least seven (7) members and include the chair, at least one (1) expert member, and one (1) lay member. GBR-9 mirrors this requirement, but adds that when investigational products are reviewed, a lay member must be present. See GBR-113 for additional recommendations for composition.

Per GBR-9, in order to accommodate the United States’ (US) quorum definition pursuant to regulations for the protection of human subjects in research (45 CFR 46) and the Common Rule (45 CFR 46 Subpart A), the RES also makes special arrangements to review UK-based research funded by US Federal Government departments and their agencies. In such cases, the quorum is a majority of the EC. See the ClinRegs United States page, Ethics Committee topic for more information on ethics review requirements in the US.

As indicated in GAfREC, committee member appointments are valid for up to five (5) years. Appointments may be renewed; however, members should not normally serve more than two (2) consecutive terms of five (5) years on the same EC, and members may resign at any time. Members must maintain confidentiality regarding all ethical review related matters and refuse any projects in which they have a conflict of interest. See the MHCTR and GAfREC for additional EC composition requirements.

Terms of Reference, Review Procedures, and Meeting Schedule

In addition to complying with composition requirements, GAfREC, GBR-113, and GBR-9 state that an EC must also adopt written standard operating procedures (SOPs). The SOPs should cover the entire review process from application submission to opinion and notification, amendments, and annual reporting.

Per GBR-9, applications that have been submitted via the CTIMP combined review service will be validated by the MHRA, and EC staff do not need to undertake a formal validation check. ECs should check the application against the validation checklist and request any missing information or clarifications from the applicant if required. All validated clinical trial applications for an ethical opinion should be reviewed at a full meeting of an EC. An EC should normally hold at least 10 scheduled full meetings in each year for the purpose of ethical review of applications. Additional meetings may be held where necessary to ensure that an ethical opinion on an application is given within the relevant time limit (or to discuss matters relating to the establishment or operating procedures of the EC or for training purposes). Meetings to review applications should normally be held at intervals of one (1) month unless there are holidays. The schedule of EC meetings for the financial year commencing on April 1^st should be agreed to by December 1^st in the previous financial year. The schedule should set out the dates, times, and venues of meetings, and the closing date for applications for each meeting. All members and deputy members of the EC should receive details of the schedule. The closing dates for full applications should normally be 14 calendar days prior to each EC meeting. In the case of applications for Phase 1 clinical trials in healthy volunteers, Type 1 ECs may adopt a later closing date for applications not less than seven (7) calendar days prior to the meeting and may accept applications booked in advance of the closing date which are submitted up to seven (7) days before the date of the meeting.

According to GBR-9, the EC Chair is responsible for ensuring that the EC reaches clearly agreed to decisions on all matters. If the Chair is unavailable, then the meeting should normally be chaired by the vice-Chair or, if the vice Chair is also unavailable, by the alternate vice-Chair. The EC meeting should reach unanimous decisions by consensus wherever possible. Where a consensus is not achievable, a formal vote should be taken by a counting of hands. The decision of the EC should be determined by a simple majority of those members present and entitled to vote. A record should be kept of the number of votes, including abstentions, in the minutes. Where the vote is tied, the Chair may give a casting vote, but should first consider any other options to arrive at a more consensual decision. Where any member wishes to record a formal dissent from the decision of the committee, this should be recorded in the minutes but should not be included in the opinion letter. An agenda should be prepared for an EC meeting and EC staff must prepare minutes of the EC meetings. See GBR-9 for additional requirements on the agenda, meeting conduct/decisions, and minutes during full EC meetings.

As per GBR-9, documents for EC meetings should be distributed as soon as possible after the agenda is finalized and applications have been validated, and in any case no later than 10 calendar days prior to the meeting (with the exception of expedited, proportionate review, and Phase 1 applications where there has been prior agreement). Under no circumstances should full applications be tabled at the meeting. Applications should be made available to members via the HRA Assessment and Review Portal (HARP) as soon as the application is validated, and an email sent to the EC members to inform them the application is now viewable.

GBR-9 requires ECs to retain all the documentation relating to a CTIMP on which it gives an opinion:

Where the trial proceeds, for at least three (3) years from the conclusion or early termination of the trial
Where the trial does not proceed (e.g., it is given an unfavorable opinion, or does not start following a favorable opinion), for at least three (3) years from the date of the opinion

In accordance with GBR-9, documentation should be retained on all invalid applications for at least one (1) year from the date of invalidation; and for three (3) years where the application is withdrawn by the EC, the chief investigator, or the sponsor after the EC review but before a final opinion is given. Signed final copies of the minutes of full EC meetings and sub-committee business should be retained electronically for at least 20 years. Where paper records are destroyed in accordance with this policy, they should be shredded and disposed of as confidential waste. Electronic records of studies will be retained indefinitely.

For detailed EC procedures and information on other administrative processes, see GAfREC, GBR-113, and GBR-9.

1-6, Glossary, Annex A, Annex C, Annex E, and Annex F

Part 2, Part 3 (11, 12, 14, 15, 17, and 18), and Schedule 2

Amendment of Regulation 12 of the Principal Regulations; and Part 2 (Conditions Based on Article 3 of the Directive)

Introduction (Purpose and Scope, and Implementation), Terminology (Glossary), and Sections 1, 2, 3, and 15

Foreword, Introduction, 1.24, 1.27, 2.6, 3, and 5.11

Search Research Ethics Committee

Definitions of Authorised REC and Recognized REC

Research Ethics Committee (REC) Scope

Scope of Review

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Overview

According to the G-NHSRC and the G-COMREC, the primary scope of information assessed by the two (2) National Commission for Science and Technology (NCST)-approved ethics committees (ECs)—the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) and the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC)—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-HlthResConduct states that scientific design; recruitment of research participants; care and protection of research participants; ethical consideration; and community consideration are essential elements that the NHSRC and COMREC must review in a clinical trial application. Per the G-NHSRC, the NHSRC must also pay special attention to reviewing informed consent and to protecting the welfare of certain classes of participants deemed to be vulnerable (See the Vulnerable Populations; Children/Minors; Pregnant Women, Fetuses & Neonates; Prisoners; and Mentally Impaired sections for additional information about these populations).

The G-HlthResConduct and the R-HlthResCoord indicate that COMREC, as a subsidiary of NHSRC, only reviews and approves studies involving or originating from the College of Medicine (COM) or Kamuzu College of Nursing (KCN) (now known collectively as the Kamuzu University of Health Sciences (KUHeS), per MWI-62) faculty members and students, and their collaborators/coinvestigators/affiliates. The NHSRC has the sole jurisdiction to review studies with a national interest and multicenter studies, including those from COM and KCN, as well as studies from all other researchers and institutions.

Role in Clinical Trial Approval Process

The R-HlthResCoord indicates that before submitting a clinical trial application to the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA), the sponsor or principal investigator (PI) must obtain full ethical approval from either the NHSRC or COMREC. Parallel submissions of a clinical trial application to an EC and the PMRA are prohibited.

Moreover, as specified in the R-HlthResCoord, for all studies originating outside Malawi, the sponsor or the PI is required to obtain approval from an EC based in their country prior to submitting an application to the NHSRC or COMREC for ethical review and approval.

Per the G-NHSRC and the G-COMREC, the applicable EC will screen submitted applications for completeness, and help determine the type of review to be conducted.

The G-NHSRC states that new studies submitted to the NHSRC are generally reviewed by a fully convened NHSRC meeting. The following studies will be reviewed by the full NHSRC:

All high-risk studies
Studies involving vulnerable populations (including pregnant women, prisoners, mentally incompetent patients, etc.)
Any clinical interventional study that randomly assigns human participants to alternative experimental or placebo groups
Studies involving sensitive information connected to personal identifiers
Studies previously reviewed that require major issues to be addressed

The G-NHSRC and the G-COMREC indicate that following the NHSRC’s or COMREC’s review, the EC will decide to approve the research, stipulate minor changes for approval, or not approve the research. A negative decision on an application must be supported by clearly stated reasons. In addition, the G-NHSRC states that if the NHSRC determines that substantive changes/clarifications must be made before approval may be granted, the study will be deferred for a full NHSRC meeting.

The G-COMREC specifies that the COMREC’s approval of a new application is valid for one (1) year. However, the R-HlthResCoord indicates that EC approval of a study is valid for the period of the study as described in the protocol, which is effective from the date of approval as indicated in the approval letter.

The R-HlthResCoord, the G-NHSRC, and the G-COMREC state that the EC must review and approve any protocol amendments prior to those changes being implemented. See MWI-52 and MWI-44 for the NHSRC and COMREC amendment request forms, respectively. Any changes cannot be implemented until approved by the EC.

The G-COMREC requires that COMREC follow the progress of studies for which a positive decision has been reached and establish a subcommittee responsible for monitoring ongoing studies. The follow-up review intervals are determined by the nature of the research project. However, each protocol should undergo a follow-up review at least once a year. As part of its monitoring process, COMREC conducts inspections of institutions and study sites.

Studies of National Interest

All studies of national interest, as defined in the G-NHSRC, the G-COMREC, and the R-HlthResCoord to include all vaccine trials and stem cell research, should be referred to the NHSRC, regardless of the origin of the protocol. The NHSRC may form a standing committee for that specific project, which will monitor the project through to its conclusion, composed of members to be drawn on the basis of their expertise.

Multicenter Studies

As delineated in the R-HlthResCoord, the NHSRC is designated and mandated to review and approve multicenter clinical trials, including those originating outside Malawi. The NHSRC will conduct a full initial review of the same protocols for a multicenter study submitted by different investigators provided that such protocols are submitted simultaneously. Protocols for the same multicenter trial to be implemented at different institutions may also be merged into one (1) protocol that the NHSRC will treat as a joint submission for review.

Continuing Review

According to the G-NHSRC and the G-COMREC, all approved studies running for more than one (1) year are subject to continuing annual review by the approving EC (the NHSRC or COMREC). If the materials for continuing EC review are not received within one (1) month following the expiration date of the previous approval, then the study will be classified as lapsed and inactive. If a study has lapsed, the EC will order that all study-related operations cease, except those necessary for the welfare of the participants. Per the G-NHSRC, if the PI wants to continue an NHSRC-reviewed study that has lapsed for two (2) months, the PI must submit a new application for NHSRC review and wait for approval before resuming research under the protocol. MWI-53 indicates that the NHSRC follows, at a minimum, the regulations set forth in the Declaration of Helsinki (MWI-42) and the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) guidelines as the criteria for continuing review of a study. The PI is responsible for timely submission of a continuing review application to prevent any lapse in NHSRC approval. NHSRC regulations do not provide for exceptions to the requirement for continuing review. The NHSRC’s continuing review application form is available at MWI-53.

Expedited Review

Per the G-NHSRC and the G-COMREC, research studies that have previously been reviewed by a fully convened committee and require the PI to address minor issues, may be approved through the NHSRC’s or COMREC’s expedited processes. Studies by students may also be considered for expedited review. Expedited review can be considered for continuing review of research previously approved by the NHSRC or COMREC, where the research is permanently closed to the enrollment of new subjects, and all subjects have completed all research related interventions.

Per the G-COMREC, COMREC’s review period for such a resubmission must not exceed 14 days from the date of the resubmission. The G-NHSRC further indicates that the NHSRC will also consider expedited review for continuing review of research previously approved by NHSRC where no subjects have been enrolled and no additional risks have been identified, or where the remaining research activities are limited to data analysis and report writing.

For more information on each EC’s expedited review procedures, see the G-NHSRC and the G-COMREC.

Exemption from Review

As delineated in the G-NHSRC and the G-COMREC, certain types of human participants research may be exempted from NHSRC or COMREC review. Exemption may be considered for research involving the collection or study of existing data, documents, records, program evaluation, pathological specimens, or diagnostic specimens, if the sources are publicly available or if the information is recorded by the investigator in such a manner that subjects cannot be identified directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects.

Suspension or Termination of Study/Approval

Per the G-NHSRC, the NHSRC chairperson or the convened NHSRC may suspend a study at any time if it is determined that the study requires further review or evaluation. This determination may be made in the event of an adverse event, non-compliance, or other danger to human participants. The study will be reviewed at the next convened meeting to determine if it requires changes. The NHSRC must notify the PI and the sponsor in writing specifying reasons for suspension or termination with a copy to the National Research Council of Malawi (NRCM). The NRCM must be informed of all the suspended or terminated studies with detailed reasons for the decision. In the event of documented serious adverse events and any unanticipated problems as documented by the researcher, the NHSRC must terminate the study and order the investigator to follow up with study participants. In the case of any officially or unofficially reported noncompliance, protocol violation, or deviation by the researcher, the NHSRC must suspend the study to ensure safety of the study participants and carry out an investigation. Upon investigation of the problem prompting the suspension of the study, the convened NHSRC must terminate the study if convinced beyond any reasonable doubt that there was noncompliance, deviation, or violation of the protocol.

The G-COMREC states that COMREC may recommend to COM management suspension or termination of approval of research that is not being conducted in accordance with the guidelines, or that has been associated with unexpected serious harm to participants. Any suspension or termination of approval must include a statement of the reasons for COMREC's action and must be reported promptly to the investigator, appropriate institutional officials, Dean of Postgraduate Studies and Research, and the Principal of the COM. The Principal of the COM must then send a report of suspended or terminated studies with the reasons contained therein to the NCST and the PMRA, or any other government agency responsible for research policy matters.

1.0, 3.2, 3.3, 5.1, 5.4-5.9, 6.0, and 7.0

1, 7, and 9

1.0, 2.0, 3.1, 5.1-5.4, 5.7, 6.2, and 9.2

2.0, 6.0, 7.0, 7.2, 8.1-8.4, 8.6, and 9.0

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

New Info (Not Yet in Profile)

On April 10, 2025, the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) (Amendment) Regulations 2024 was signed into law. There is a 12-month implementation period before the amended regulations come fully into force on April 10, 2026. For more information, see the Health Research Authority news update.

Overview

According to GAfREC, the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), and GBR-9, the primary scope of information assessed by ethics committees (ECs) within the United Kingdom (UK) Health Departments’ Research Ethics Service (RES) (GBR-62) relates to maintaining and protecting the dignity and rights of research participants and ensuring their safety throughout their participation in a clinical trial. (Note: ECs are known as research ethics committees (RECs) in the UK). GAfREC specifies that ethical review is required for research proposals that involve investigational products (IPs), material consisting of human cells, and other situations that are described in GAfREC.

As per GAfREC, the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, the MHCTR2006-No2, and GBR-113, ECs must pay special attention to reviewing informed consent and to protecting the welfare of certain classes of participants deemed to be vulnerable. (See the Vulnerable Populations; Children/Minors; Pregnant Women, Fetuses & Neonates; Prisoners; and Mentally Impaired sections for additional information about these populations).

As indicated in GAfREC, the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, GBR-113, and GBR-9, ECs are responsible for ensuring an independent, timely, and competent review of all ethical aspects of the clinical trial protocol. They must act in the interests of the potential research participants and the communities involved by evaluating the possible risks and expected benefits to participants; confirming the suitability of the investigator(s), facilities, and methods; and verifying the adequacy of confidentiality and privacy safeguards. See GAfREC, the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, and GBR-9 for detailed ethics review guidelines.

GBR-112 indicates that certain ECs are flagged for special expertise including gene therapy or stem cell clinical trials; Phase 1 studies in healthy volunteers; Phase 1 studies in participants; research involving adults lacking capacity; research involving children; research involving prisoners or prisons; or fast-track ECs.

Role in Clinical Trial Approval Process

As described in GBR-9, GBR-66, and GBR-95, the type of EC responsible for approval (known as a “favorable opinion” in the UK) within the RES depends on the type of research being conducted. Per GAfREC and GBR-9, ECs are recognized or established by the United Kingdom Ethics Committee Authority (UKECA) to conduct reviews of clinical trials for IPs (known as clinical trials for investigational medicinal products (CTIMPs) in the UK). Per GAfREC, RES-recognized ECs established under Health Department policy within each of the four (4) UK nations (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales) review research studies other than IP clinical trials. Also see GBR-64 for definitions of EC terminology and GBR-111 and GBR-112 to search for ECs within the RES.

As indicated in the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, and GAfREC, IP applications require the favorable opinion of a UKECA-recognized EC, and approval by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) prior to the sponsor or the designated legal representative initiating the trial. The G-CTApp states that all new clinical trial applications must be prepared, submitted, and reviewed via the combined review process, wherein a single application route and coordinated review by MHRA and the EC leads to a single UK decision. New clinical trial applications for combined review are prepared and electronically submitted to the new combined review section of Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) (GBR-125). Per GBR-78, IRAS does not change the requirements for review, including authorizations or signatures, of any regulatory authority or National Health Service (NHS) body. Therefore, it requires different authorizations depending on the type of study and the applicable review bodies. According to GBR-9, submissions of the electronic application must be made to IRAS on the same day that a booking is made to schedule an EC review through the NHS REC’s Online Booking Service (GBR-95).

According to the MHCTR, GAfREC, and GBR-9, for all studies, only one (1) EC review (referred to as the “main EC”) is needed for a project taking place in the UK, regardless of the number of sites. Furthermore, GBR-9 states that the Chief Investigator (CI) should be based in the UK and that the REC may agree exceptionally to an application being submitted by a CI based outside the UK, but should consider as part of the ethical review whether adequate arrangements are in place for supervision of the study in the UK. The ethical review includes an assessment of the suitability of each site or sites at which the research is to be conducted in the UK. The site assessment is not a separate ethical review, but forms part of the single ethical review of the research. Management permission is still required from the organization responsible for hosting the research before it commences at any site. In the case of international studies, an application must be made to an EC in the UK, whether or not the study has a favorable ethical opinion from a committee outside the UK, and whether or not it has started outside the UK.

Per GBR-68, unless an application is being processed under the proportionate review service, the applicant should attend the EC meeting if possible. The EC will notify the sponsor of its decision, usually within 10 working days of the EC meeting. GBR-9 indicates that the EC should reach one (1) of the following decisions on any application reviewed at a full meeting or a proportionate review sub-committee meeting:

A final opinion, which may be either favorable with standard conditions, favorable with additional conditions, or unfavorable
Provisional opinion with request for further information, which means the EC may decide that a final opinion cannot be issued until further information or clarification has been received from the applicant

The MHCTR, GBR-9, and GBR-68 state that the EC must give its opinion within 60 calendar days of receipt of a valid application. When an EC requires further information before confirming its opinion, it may give a provisional opinion and may make one (1) written request for further information, clarification, or changes to documentation. The time required for the EC to receive a complete response to its request does not count against the 60-day timeline. Certain studies, including gene therapy studies, will take 90 days, or 180 days if a specialist group or committee is consulted. For other exceptions, see GAfREC and the MHCTR. (See the Submission Process and Timeline of Review sections for detailed submission process requirements.)

Per GBR-116, the Health Research Authority (HRA), on behalf of the UK, offers a fast-track research ethics review. Fast-track ethics review is open to global clinical trials and Phase 1 trials, whether the sponsor is commercial or non-commercial. This includes:

Any CTIMP led from the UK with at least one (1) other country participating
Any CTIMP led from outside the UK which could be placed in any country and the UK is competing for participation (including any only taking place in the UK)
Any Phase 1 or Phase 1/2 CTIMP in healthy volunteers or participants

Fast-track ethics review is not available for any CTIMP involving a gene therapy medicinal product, any CTIMP funded by the US Department of Health and Human Services, and any other type of clinical trial or research study.

Per GBR-9, the EC’s favorable ethical opinion applies for the stated duration of the study, except where action is taken to suspend or terminate the opinion. The MHCTR, GAfREC, and IRAS (GBR-78) require the applicant to identify an expected end date for the study. A change to the definition of the end of the study is a substantial amendment. Extension of the study beyond the period specified in the application form is a non-substantial amendment.

GBR-9 describes EC processes related to reviewing and approving clinical trial amendments and any related notifications. The sponsor of a CTIMP may make an amendment to a clinical trial authorization, other than a substantial amendment, at any time after the trial has started. These do not need to be notified. If the amendment is substantial, the sponsor is required to submit a valid amendment to the MHRA and/or the REC that gave the favorable opinion of the trial. Where the sponsor requests an ethical opinion on a CTIMP, the EC should provide this in all cases within 35 calendar days of receiving a valid amendment. If the opinion is unfavorable, the sponsor may then modify the proposed amendment. A written notice of the modification should be sent to the main EC at least 14 calendar days before it is due to be implemented. The EC may then give an unfavorable opinion on the modified amendment within 14 calendar days, otherwise it may be implemented. See GBR-9 and GBR-98 for guidance on what changes qualify as a substantial amendment, which requires notification to the EC and MHRA. GBR-9 states that while the EC is not responsible for proactive monitoring, it has a duty to keep the favorable ethical opinion under review in the light of progress reports and significant developments and may review the opinion at any time. If information raises concerns about the suitability of the site or investigator, the favorable opinion may be reviewed.

Introduction (Purpose and Scope), Terminology (Glossary), and Sections 1, 3, 5, 6, and 10.9

Foreword, 1.27, 2, and 3

Search Research Ethics Committee

2.3, 3, 4.3, and 5.4

Combined review of clinical trials of investigational medicinal products

Amendment of the Clinical Trials Regulations; Amendment of the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000

Amendment of Regulation 12 of the Principal Regulations; and Part 2 (Conditions Based on Article 3 of the Directive)

Part 1 (2 and 3), Part 3 (11, 12, 14, 15, 17, and 18), Schedule 2, and Schedule 3 (Part 1)

Ethics Committee Fees

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

National Health Sciences Research Committee

According to MWI-4 and MWI-15, non-Malawian researchers must pay $150 USD or its equivalent in Malawian Kwacha to the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) upon submission of a research proposal. Malawian students (Masters and below) are required to pay 5000 Malawian Kwacha.

The G-NHSRC and MWI-5 indicate that following the protocol’s approval, the principal investigator must also pay the Ministry of Health (MOH) a fee of 10% of the total budget indicated in the proposal to cover NHSRC institutional capacity strengthening and administrative operating expenses. MWI-15 further specifies that the fee, referred to as a 10% NHSRC Human Subject Protection (HSP) fee, must be paid by PhD students and above.

MWI-5 clarifies that the NHSRC fee and the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA)’s Clinical Trial Review Committee (CTRC) fees are included in the 10%. Payment of the 10% fee must be made for all NHSRC-approved research projects prior to commencement of the research study.

Payment Instructions

Per MWI-15, the application fee and the 10% HSP fee may be paid at the MOH Headquarters Cash Office or through the following bank details:

Account Name: NHSRC NCST Review Fees
Account Number: 1010759176
Bank Name: National Bank of Malawi
Bank Address: Capital City Branch, Lilongwe 3, Malawi
Swift Code: NBMAMWMW008

College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee

As per MWI-5, non-Malawian researchers must pay $150 USD and Malawian researchers must pay 500 Malawian Kwacha to the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC) upon the submission of a research proposal. COMREC is also mandated to charge a College of Medicine (COM) fee of 10% of the total budget indicated in the proposal. As delineated in MWI-1, the COM’s Dean of Postgraduate Studies and Research can grant waivers for the 10% fee.

However, the G-COMREC states that the COM’s processing fee is $100 USD for each new protocol submission and resubmission for the fourth time, and that eligible investigators may apply to management for exemption from paying the fee.

Payment Instructions

No information is currently available regarding payment instructions for COMREC.

3.3.10

8.0

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

As set forth in GAfREC, ethics committees (ECs) are not permitted to charge an application fee or seek any other financial contribution or donation for reviewing research proposals. Additionally, EC members receive no payment for contributing to the application review process at scheduled meetings or for attending these meetings.

4.3

Oversight of Ethics Committees

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Overview

The R-HlthResCoord indicates that the National Commission for Science and Technology (NCST) is the central statutory body responsible for coordinating and regulating all research, science, and technology related activities in Malawi, as mandated by the SciTechAct.

The R-HlthResCoord further specifies that the NCST provides oversight to the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) and the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC). The NCST’s core responsibilities in this capacity include:

Participating as an ex-officio member for the NHSRC and COMREC by having a voting representative from the NCST sit on both committees
Reviewing and approving the ethics committees’ (EC) guidelines and standard operating procedures
Monitoring the ECs’ performance and adherence to relevant national policies, laws, regulations, and guidelines

Registration, Auditing, and Accreditation

As stated in the SciTechOrder, an NCST-issued license is required for the accreditation of research institutions and the establishment of an institutional EC. Additional information regarding the NCST-issued license is not available at this time.

Part IV

2.0 and 2.2

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Overview

As stated in GAfREC and GBR-9, the United Kingdom (UK)-wide Research Ethics Service (RES) (GBR-62) provides proportionate and responsive ethical review of research through its “recognized” ethics committees (ECs), known as research ethics committees (RECs) in the UK. Per the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, and GAfREC, the UK Ethics Committee Authority (UKECA) is the statutory body that recognizes ECs for the review of clinical trials of investigational products (CTIMPs). The UK Health Departments have authorized England’s Health Research Authority (HRA) to perform some of the RES functions (more details below).

As indicated in the MHCTR and GBR-9, the UKECA recognizes two (2) types of ECs for new CTIMPs:

Type 1: Reviews Phase 1 clinical trials of investigational products (IPs) taking place at any site in the UK, where the sponsor has no knowledge of any evidence that the product has effects likely to be beneficial to the participants of the trial, and the participants are healthy and not suffering from the disease or condition to which the trial relates.
Type 3: Reviews clinical trials of IPs taking place at any site in the UK, including first-in-person studies involving people with the target disease or condition to which the trial relates.

As stated in GAfREC, the HRA performs the following EC oversight activities on behalf of the UKECA:

Develops and manages a national training program for ECs
Develops, implements, and maintains standard operating procedures (SOPs) for ECs and provides advice and support to ECs on procedural issues
Develops a quality assurance program, including accreditation of ECs, based on regular monitoring and audit of their operation and performance
Provides guidance and advice to assist ECs in their work and encourage consistency of approach to common issues in research ethics
Acts for UKECA to provide a national mechanism for operational advice and assistance to ECs recognized to review and approve clinical trials
Acts for UKECA to handle appeals against the unfavorable opinions of ECs in respect of CTIMPs
Acts for UKECA to transfer to a successor EC the functions of an EC that has ceased to operate or that has been varied, abolished, or had its recognition revoked
Acts for UKECA to reallocate to ECs applications made to the Gene Therapy Advisory Committee which do not require its review

Further, per GAfREC, the following oversight functions are the responsibility of UKECA for the purposes of clinical trials:

Establishes or recognizes ECs
Establishes or recognizes ECs to act in relation to such descriptions or classes of research as it considers appropriate
Abolishes or revokes the recognition of ECs that it has established or recognized
Monitors the extent to which ECs adequately perform their functions, including through annual reports from ECs it has recognized
Approves standing orders and SOPs for EC business and operations, as well as variations and revocations to these orders and procedures

Registration, Auditing, and Accreditation

Per GAfREC, HRA, acting for UKECA, develops a quality assurance program to encourage a consistently high level of service to applicants, including accreditation of ECs, based on regular monitoring and audit of their operation and performance.

GBR-123 indicates that HRA implements a rolling accreditation program to audit UK ECs against standards as detailed in GAfREC and GBR-9. ECs are issued with an audit decision: full accreditation, accreditation with conditions (low-risk non-compliance identified requiring an action plan), or provisional accreditation (high- and low-risk issues requiring an action plan). Published bi-annually, HRA’s latest accreditation report is at GBR-124. In addition, quality control checks are undertaken, and results are shared with management teams. For example, operational managers observe EC meetings and provide a check against agreed-upon standards relating to meeting conduct and minute taking. Findings from the meeting observations are shared with the EC chair and staff and collated to identify common themes to inform improvements. For more information about quality assurance, contact quality.assurance@hra.nhs.uk.

Introduction (Purpose and Scope), Implementation, Terminology (Glossary), and Sections 1, 2, and 3

Accreditation Scheme for Research Ethics Committees and Quality Control

1.3, 2.1, 2.3, 3.3, 5.4, Glossary, Annex C, Annex D, Annex E, and Annex F

Part 2 (Conditions Based on Article 3 of the Directive)

Part 2, Part 3 (12), and Schedule 2

Submission Process

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Overview

According to the G-CTARevVacBiol, the R-HlthResCoord, and MWI-50, the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA) requires the applicant to obtain PMRA approval and ethics committee (EC) approval of a clinical trial application.

The R-HlthResCoord indicates that before submitting a clinical trial application to the PMRA, the sponsor or principal investigator (PI) must obtain full ethical approval from either of the two (2) National Commission for Science and Technology (NCST)-approved ECs—the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) or the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC). Parallel submissions of a clinical trial application to an EC and the PMRA are prohibited.

Regulatory Submission

According to MWI-60, an electronic or soft copy of the clinical trial application dossier must be sent to registration@pmra.mw and info@pmra.mw.

As per the G-CTARevVacBiol and MWI-9, applicants must submit three (3) copies of the clinical trial application to the PMRA. MWI-60 further requires that the three (3) dossier hard copies be submitted in a lever arch file to the Director General. Each section of the dossier must be well demarcated for ease of reference by PMRA reviewers. The application may be made by a sponsor or the sponsor’s agent, who must submit a power of attorney (MWI-33) attesting to be a duly appointed agent.

There is no specified language requirement for the clinical trial documents to be submitted to the PMRA.

Ethics Review Submission

National Health Sciences Research Committee

As stated in the G-HlthResConduct and MWI-15, the applicant is required to bind and submit application materials (plus an electronic copy, per MWI-15) to the NHSRC at least three (3) weeks before the date of the review meeting.

MWI-15 states that applications should be submitted to the NHSRC at the following address:

The Chairperson
National Health Sciences Research Committee
Ministry of Health Research Department Area 2/124
P.O. Box 30377
Lilongwe 3, Malawi
Tel: +265 1 789 400

The electronic copy should be submitted at the same time to research@health.gov.mw and mohdoccentre@gmail.com.

MWI-15 indicates that three (3) copies of each item indicated in the NHSRC Checklist (MWI-4) must be submitted in the research proposal package to the NHSRC (See the Submission Content section for a list of these items). Three (3) copies for Malawian student proposals (up to master’s level) must also be submitted to the NHSRC secretariat for expedited review. The submission must be bound in the order indicated by MWI-4 as one (1) PDF document. (See the Submission Content section for more details on the individual elements of the NHSRC research proposal submission.)

According to MWI-15 and MWI-4, the data collection tools and informed consent forms must be provided to the NHSRC in both English and Chichewa (or the appropriate local language).

The R-HlthResCoord indicates that for multicenter trials, sponsors and PIs may plan to hold a pre-clinical trial submission and authorization meeting with the NHSRC, at their own choice and cost. The sponsor or PI must write to the NHSRC secretariat of the review committee to request the meeting’s arrangement at least four (4) weeks in advance of the suggested meeting date. For more information, see the R-HlthResCoord.

College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee

Per the R-HlthResCoord, COMREC may at its own discretion allow a pre-clinical trial application procedure, where applicable, at the request and cost of the sponsor. As stated in the G-HlthResConduct, the applicant is required to submit application materials to COMREC at least three (3) weeks before the date of the review meeting.

According to MWI-10, protocol submissions to COMREC may be made through the Research Ethics Information Management System (REIMS) (MWI-19). Following submission, the protocol will be reviewed, and feedback will be given through the applicant’s registered email address. All file attachments should be in PDF format with clear, descriptive names. Per MWI-19, ECs in Tanzania, Rwanda, and Kenya also participate in REIMS. See MWI-10 for more information on the REIMS submission portal.

MWI-19 provides the following additional contact information for COMREC:

Tel: +265 888 118 993
Email: comrec@medcol.mw

However, MWI-1 indicates that all documents should be submitted to COMREC by email to comrec@medcol.mw in one (1) PDF file, if the file size does not exceed 5MB. If the file size is over 5MB, then the file should be sent as a compressed zipped file. The data collection tools and informed consent forms must be provided in both English and Chichewa (or the appropriate local language).

3.2

1 and 8

2.0, 7.1, and 8.0-8.3

Last content review/update: January 21, 2025

New Info (Not Yet in Profile)

On April 10, 2025, the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) (Amendment) Regulations 2024 was signed into law. There is a 12-month implementation period before the amended regulations come fully into force on April 10, 2026. For more information, see the Health Research Authority news update.

Overview

In accordance with the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, the G-CTApp, and GBR-9, the United Kingdom (UK) requires the sponsor or the designated legal representative to obtain clinical trial authorization from the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) prior to initiating the trial. Per G-CTApp and G-IRASCombRev, the UK’s combined review process offers a single application route and coordinated/parallel review from MHRA and the ethics committee (EC) leading to a single UK decision for clinical trials.

Note: G-CTApprovedCountries and the MHCTR-EUExit list the countries where a clinical trial sponsor or their legal representative may be established; these countries are initially European Union (EU) and European Economic Area (EEA) countries.

Combined Review Submission

Per G-CTApp and G-IRASCombRev, all new clinical trials applications of investigational products (CTIMPs) must be prepared, submitted, and reviewed via the combined review process using the Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) (GBR-125). For support and getting started, users should review GBR-72 and contact the combined review team at cwow@hra.nhs.uk. Step-by-step instructions are provided in G-IRASCombRev. As delineated in GBR-9, applications submitted via the combined review service are submitted jointly by the chief investigator and the sponsor. Per GBR-116, applicants seeking fast-track review of clinical trial applications must also apply via combined review on GBR-125. Per the G-CTApp, MHRA’s notification scheme enables a more streamlined and risk-proportionate approach to processing clinical trial authorization for “initial” applications. The scheme only applies to clinical trial applications for Phase 4 and certain Phase 3 clinical trials deemed to be of lower risk. Interest in the notification scheme should be registered via the combined review process (GBR-125). Per G-ATMP, all advanced therapy medicinal products must submit clinical trial applications using the same processes as all other medicines. See Scope of Review section for fast-track eligibility criteria.

Per GBR-122, for studies that were submitted before combined review, these applicants should continue to submit amendments and reports for these studies at IRAS via GBR-78’s log-in. HRA will update sponsors and applicants with full instructions and plenty of notice for any planned changes in the future, such as the migration of existing, ongoing studies. See GBR-122, for additional details on the migration of existing materials in IRAS. GBR-72 includes learning resources and a video on the combined review process.

G-IRASCombRev contains a step-by-step guide to combined review submission. The following is an overview of the steps:

Finalize protocol and supporting documents
New users create IRAS account and create a new project and allocate roles
Complete project details, study information, and clinical trial dataset in IRAS and upload supporting documentation
Send application to the sponsor to review and authorize
Book an EC online and submit application

G-IRASCombRev indicates that when selecting an EC meeting that is not the first available meeting, the 60-day regulatory clock for both the EC and the MHRA will start on the cutoff date for the meeting that is chosen, which is 14 days before the meeting date. Once booked, the EC booking page will update to show the confirmed booking details. The applicant will then be able to scroll down the page to select the option to “submit to the regulators.” See G-IRASCombRev for detailed step-by-step instructions.

For overall help during the submission process, see the CTapp-Issues which identifies common issues with validation and assessment of clinical trial applications and how to avoid them.

Other regulatory information aside from new clinical trial applications are to be submitted pursuant to the G-MHRASubmiss. These submittals include substantial amendments for existing clinical trials, end-of-trial notifications, and developmental safety update reports (DSURs). The G-CTAuth-GBR also states that clinical trials not approved or yet transitioned over to the combined review process should continue to use the online MHRA Submissions portal (GBR-13). The steps for gaining access to GBR-13 are contained in the G-MHRASubmiss and GBR-11.

For overviews of submittals to MHRA, see GBR-18. Also see the Initiation, Agreements & Registration section for information on obtaining a trial identification number during trial registration.

The UKwide-Rsrch provides guidance and requirements for research in more than one (1) United Kingdom (UK) nation, and specifies that the four (4) nations of the UK take a consistent approach to study-wide reviews so that sponsors only need to submit one (1) application on GBR-125 in most circumstances. Each UK nation will take assurances from the site-wide review conducted by the lead nation (the nation conducting the initial review).

As described in GBR-78, other relevant approvals can be sought on the IRAS site. For example, applicants can request inclusion in the National Institute for Health and Care Research Clinical Research Network (NIHR CRN) Portfolio, which comprises high-quality clinical research studies that receive support services from the Clinical Research Network in England.

Per G-CTApp, MHRA supports the conduct of trials with complex innovative designs such as umbrella, basket, platform, and master protocol plus submodules. When submitting a clinical trial application for a trial with innovative designs that involve prospective major adaptations, the sponsor must justify the choice of a complex trial design, ensure that each adaptation as well as the entire trial are safe and scientifically sound, and describe how the integrity of trial results will be maintained throughout the conduct of the trial. See G-CTApp for example scenarios of when it is appropriate to propose major adaptations via submission of a substantial amendment request. Before submitting an application for authorization of a trial with a complex innovative design and/or an amendment requesting approval of major adaptations, sponsors are recommended to establish a dialogue with the MHRA and seek advice.

As delineated in the MHCTR, the clinical trial application and accompanying material must be provided in English.

Terminology (Glossary) and Sections 1.1-1.2 and 14

Combined Review - What will happen to ongoing CTIMP studies submitted in the standard system?

CI Checklist Before Seeking Approval, CTA Submission, and Ethics Submission

Help (Preparing and Submitting Applications)

Apply to conduct a clinical trial for an advanced therapy medicinal product

2

Trial Sponsor and legal Representative, Combined review of clinical trials of investigational medicinal products, Documents to send with your application, New notification scheme, and Requesting approval of trials with complex innovative designs

Amending your trial protocol or other documentation

2

Amendment of Regulation 12 of the Principal Regulations; and Part 2 (Conditions Based on Article 3 of the Directive)

Part 1 (3) and Part 3 (12, 14, 17, and 18)

Approvals for project based research in the National Health Service (NHS) and Northern Ireland’s Health and Social Care (HSC) Service

Submission Content

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Regulatory Authority Requirements

As per the G-CTAProcsVacBiol, the G-CTARevVacBiol, and MWI-60, the following documentation must be submitted to the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA) in an application to conduct a clinical trial (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

Comprehensive table of contents for the entire application, including a complete list of all documents provided in the application. The location of each document should be identified by tab identifiers. In general, the name for the tab identifier should be the name of the document
Cover letter signed by the principal investigator (PI) or sponsor
Proof of payment of the application and registration fees
Signed and stamped Clinical Trial Application (Form CT 8) (MWI-9)
Current version of the study protocol signed and dated by the sponsor and investigator (in the format provided in the International Council for Harmonisation’s (ICH) good clinical practice (GCP) guidelines and/or in line with Attachment 1 of MWI-60)
Investigator’s Brochure (IB), where applicable (in the format provided in the ICH GCP guidelines)
Certificate of Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) of the investigational product (IP) (also referred to as an investigational medicinal product (IMP) in Malawi) and/or placebo, or evidence of manufacture quality, safety, and consistency
Mock-up labels for the IP
Blank case report forms (CRFs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) reporting form to be used in the study
Investigational Medicinal Product Dossier (IMPD) or alternative as provided in Attachment 2 of MWI-60
Stability data of the IP and auxiliary medicine(s) for climatic zone IVa if not registered in Malawi by the PMRA
Evidence of registration of the IP or auxiliary medicines in a country with Stringent Regulatory Authority (SRA) and/or Certificate of Pharmaceutical Product (CoPP), i.e., if IP/auxiliary medicines are not registered by the PMRA
Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) for IP and auxiliary medicines
Pharmacy plan
Report summaries of prior clinical trials with the IP (part of IB if it is in the ICH format)
Capacity building plans including training and updating of staff involved in the trial
Informed consent form (ICF) (in ICH format)
Declaration of intent by the national PI or contact person (MWI-31)
Signed and completed declaration by investigators (MWI-32)
Investigator(s) Curriculum Vitae(s) (CVs), including that of pharmacist(s)
Financial declaration by sponsor and PI (MWI-59)
Ethical clearance certificate from an independent ethics committee (EC) recognized by the laws of Malawi
Certified copy of clinical trial insurance for study participants endorsed by the National Commission for Science and Technology (NCST)
Malpractice insurance for investigators and associated staff endorsed by the NCST
Evidence of accreditation or equivalent of the designated laboratories (see the World Health Organization (WHO)’s guidance on Good Clinical Laboratory Practice (MWI-30))
Completed PMRA Material Transfer Agreement Form on Shipping of Samples (MWI-14)
Description of the site facilities (pictorial presentations may be included)
Evidence of registration of investigators with appropriate bodies
Evidence of registration of pharmacists with the PMRA
Evidence of GCP training by investigators and pharmacists in the last three (3) years
Batch release certificate
Authorization of the clinical trial from the country of origin, if applicable
Full, legible copies of key, peer-reviewed published articles supporting the application
Any other requirement as may be determined by the PMRA

If any above items are not submitted, justification for not submitting the document must be provided. The application may be made by a sponsor or the sponsor’s agent, who must submit a power of attorney (MWI-33) attesting to be a duly appointed agent. See MWI-60 for more details. According to MWI-34, the guidance in the G-CTARevVacBiol and the G-CTAProcsVacBiol also apply to clinical trials of drugs.

Ethics Committee Requirements

National Health Sciences Research Committee

According to the G-NHSRC, MWI-4, and MWI-15, any proposals submitted to the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) must be accompanied by the following (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

The NHSRC checklist (MWI-4)
Cover letter from the PI
The NHSRC application form (MWI-15)
Research proposal summary, maximum four (4) pages
Full/main research proposal (see the G-NHSRC, MWI-4, and MWI-15 for details)
Data collection instruments in both English and Chichewa (or other appropriate local language)
Informed consent in both English and Chichewa (or other appropriate local language)
Letter of approval from foreign EC, where applicable (for all students studying in foreign universities)
Support letters from affiliating institutions (e.g., universities, hospitals, research institutions, or companies where the study is going to take place)
A copy of the receipt for the paid application fee
CVs for all the investigators
Proof of funding from the sponsor/funder (where applicable)

MWI-4 requires that if any of the above items are not included in the submission to the NHSRC, an explanation must be provided.

College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee

MWI-1 indicates that for submissions to the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC), a single PDF file should include the following information in the following order:

Completed copy of the COMREC checklist (MWI-1)
Cover letter from the PI
Protocol
ICFs in both English and Chichewa for adult participants ages 18 and above, parental consent forms for all minors, and assent forms (in addition to the parental consent forms) for all minors between the ages of 7 and 17
Data collection tools (those that will involve obtaining information from research participants should be translated into Chichewa)
Material transfer agreement forms and documents
Waiver letter for the 10% College of Medicine (COM) overhead fee, if applicable
Information regarding whether the research proposal has been submitted to another EC
Letter of support from COM head of the principal department hosting the research
Letter(s) of support from heads of all other departments and institutions in which any research work will be done
Evidence of current active registration with the Medical Council of Malawi for the PI and other investigators
Investigator(s) CV(s)

MWI-1 further indicates that the proposal should not be submitted unless every item on the checklist is included, or unless a reason can be provided for the absence of any item. The completed checklist must be attached to the front of the submission. See the G-COMREC and MWI-1 for more information.

Clinical Protocol

As delineated in the G-CTAProcsVacBiol, the clinical protocol should comply with the format provided in the ICH's GCP guidelines. Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the ICH's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). In addition, MWI-60 provides recommended items to address in a clinical trial protocol and related documents, based on SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) guidance.

Per the G-HlthResConduct, MWI-60, MWI-1, and MWI-22, the following elements should be included in the protocol (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

Cover page
General information (protocol title, identifying number, and date; registry name; contact information for the sponsor, medical expert, investigator(s), trial site(s), qualified physician(s), and laboratory and/or institutions involved in the study, along with role responsibilities)
Protocol summary/abstract
Background and justification
Investigator(s) CV(s) and contact information
IP description (See the Investigational Products topic for detailed coverage of this subject)
Form, dosage, route, method, and frequency of administration and treatment period
Summary of potential risks and known benefits to research participants
Hypothesis
Trial objectives and purpose
Study setting
Trial design, random selection method, and blinding level
Work plan/Gantt chart
Participant selection/withdrawal, timeline, and sample size
Participant treatment
Safety and efficacy assessments
Literature review
Adverse event reporting requirements (See the Safety Reporting section for additional information)
Statistics and methods to track trial data
Sponsor specifications for direct access to source data/documents
Quality control/quality assurance procedures and practices
Data monitoring, including composition of a data monitoring committee, and auditing
Ethical considerations, including confidentiality, and plans for seeking EC approval
Plans for communicating important protocol modifications to relevant parties
Data management and recordkeeping
Dissemination of findings
Financing and insurance details
Publication policy
Consent form, and information on who will obtain consent
Plans for collection, laboratory evaluation, and storage of biological specimens

For more detailed protocol requirements and recommendations, refer to MWI-60, MWI-22, MWI-1, and the G-HlthResConduct.

5.0

7 (Checklist of Required Documents)

1, 2, 3.2, and Screening Form

5 and 7

5.1

6

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Regulatory Authority Requirements

As specified in the G-CTApp, a clinical trial submission package to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) should contain the following documents:

Cover letter (when applicable, the subject line should state that the submission is for a Phase 1 trial and is eligible for a shortened assessment time, or if it is submitted as part of the notification scheme); this letter should clearly highlight the Purchase Order (PO) number to help the MHRA invoice and allocate payments promptly and efficiently
Clinical trial application form in PDF and XML versions
Protocol document
Investigator’s brochure (IB)
Investigational medical product dossier (IMPD) or a simplified IMPD
Summary of scientific advice obtained from the MHRA or any other regulatory authority, if available
Manufacturer’s authorization, including the importer’s authorization and Qualified Person declaration on good manufacturing practice for each manufacturing site if the product is manufactured outside the European Union (EU) (See G-ImportIMPs and the Manufacturing & Import section for more information)
Copy of the United Kingdom (UK) or the European Medicines Agency’s decision on the pediatric investigation plan and the opinion of the pediatric committee, if applicable
Content of the labelling of the investigational product (IP) (known as investigational medicinal product (IMP) in the UK) (or justification for its absence)

Ethics Committee Requirements

As per the MHCTR, the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), ECs require the chief investigator (CI) to submit the following documentation for ethics approval:

Application for an EC opinion
A summary of the trial, including justification, relevance, and methodology to be used
Research hypothesis
Statistical analysis and justification for the numbers of participants to be recruited
Protocol
IB
Peer review process details
Sponsor name and contact information
Financial arrangements for the trial (e.g., funding sources, participant reimbursement, compensation provisions in the event of trial-related injury or death, and insurance or indemnity coverage for sponsor and investigator(s)) (See the Insurance & Compensation section for additional information)
Terms of agreement between sponsor and participating institution(s)
Material to be used (including advertisements) to recruit potential research participants (See the Initiation, Agreements & Registration section for additional information on participant recruitment)
Informed consent form and copies of materials to be provided to participants (See the Required Elements section for additional information)
Participant treatment plans
Benefit/risk assessment for participants
Investigator(s) Curriculum Vitaes (CVs)
Trial design and suitability of facilities

Further, to help with planning before seeking EC approval, GBR-18 provides a checklist for CIs.

Clinical Protocol

Per GBR-9, the protocol describes the objectives, design, methodology, statistical considerations and organization of a clinical trial. According to GBR-113, the clinical protocol should contain the following elements:

Protocol summary
Sponsor or designated representative name and contact information
Investigator(s) CV(s) and contact information
IP description (See the Investigational Products topic for detailed coverage of this subject)
Form, dosage, route, method, and frequency of administration; treatment period
Trial objectives and purpose
Trial design, random selection method, and blinding level
Participant selection/withdrawal
Participant treatment
Summary of potential risks and known benefits to research participants
Safety and efficacy assessments
Adverse event reporting requirements (See the Safety Reporting section for additional information)
Statistics and methods to track trial data
Sponsor specifications for direct access to source data/documents
Quality control/quality assurance procedures and practices
Ethical considerations
Data management and recordkeeping
Financing and insurance details
Publication policy

For complete protocol requirements, refer to GBR-113.

Terminology (Statutory Definitions Relating to CTIMPs)

3.1 and 6

CI Checklist Before Seeking Approval

Documents to send with your application

Part 3 (12, 14, 15, 17, and 18) and Schedule 3 (Parts 1 and 2)

Timeline of Review

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Overview

As stated in the R-HlthResCoord, one (1) of the two (2) government approved ethics committees (ECs), the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) or the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC), must review and approve a clinical trial application prior to the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA) initiating its review and approval process. Parallel submissions of a clinical trial application to an EC and the PMRA are prohibited.

Regulatory Authority Approval

According to the G-CTARevVacBiol, the PMRA review process takes approximately six (6) weeks.

As per the G-CTARevVacBiol and the G-CTAProcsVacBiol, once the dossier is submitted to the PMRA, the application is screened for completeness. According to the G-CTARevVacBiol, the result of the screening will be communicated to the applicant within 10 working days after receipt of the application, and the screening form will be forwarded by fax. The applicant will have 10 working days to forward any outstanding documents to the PMRA. The PMRA’s technical staff then reviews the application or may forward it to an expert or evaluator for scientific review, with an allocated review period of three (3) weeks.

However, the G-CTAProcsVacBiol specifies that the application is evaluated by three (3) PMRA-appointed expert clinical trial reviewers who will provide a written report within 14 days to the designated registration office, also known as the “Focal Point” division. The Focal Point will then collate and present the expert reviews to the PMRA Clinical Trial Review Committee (CTRC). The CTRC then reviews all the available documentation and provides a recommendation for approval or rejection. The PMRA considers the CTRC’s recommendation and issues a written approval or rejection. (Per MWI-34, the guidance in the G-CTARevVacBiol and the G-CTAProcsVacBiol also apply to clinical trials of drugs.)

As stated in the G-ImpExpMP, the PMRA’s processing time for an import permit application is 10 working days.

Ethics Committee Approval

National Health Sciences Research Committee

The G-NHSRC indicates that in the case of an approval with no changes, the chairperson must inform the investigator in writing within seven (7) days. The NHSRC’s timeline for review of research proposals is not otherwise specified in the requirements.

College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee

According to the G-COMREC, COMREC must ensure that submitted complete proposals are reviewed in a timely manner, i.e., within the month of submission. A written decision is provided to the applicant within two (2) weeks of the meeting at which the decision was made.

5.1 and 5.9

2-6

1-3

5.4

7.0, 7.2, 8.0-8.2

3.5

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Overview

Per G-CTApp and G-IRASCombRev, all new clinical trials applications for investigational products (CTIMPs) must be prepared, submitted, and reviewed via the combined review process. Combined review offers a single application route and coordinated/parallel review from the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and the ethics committee (EC) leading to a single United Kingdom (UK) decision for clinical trials.

Combined Review

Per the G-CTApp and GBR-72, the initial combined review assessment will be completed within 30 days of being submitted. The G-CTApp indicates that applications for healthy volunteer trials and sponsor-determined phase 1 trials in non-oncology participants may qualify for a shortened assessment time and MHRA will work with the EC to expedite these applications. The MHRA and the EC will inform applicants of the outcome of a submission. If there are grounds for non-acceptance of the application, the applicant will have the opportunity to respond, usually within 14 days, though this may be extended on request. Communication informing the applicant of the MHRA and EC decisions following receipt of the responses will usually be sent within 60 days of receiving the original valid application. If an extension to the response date has been agreed to, then this will impact the final decision timeline. Notification of the decision relating to a gene therapy, somatic cell therapy (including xenogenic cell therapy) product, tissue engineered product, or products containing genetically modified organisms will be sent within 90 days of receiving the original application unless otherwise advised.

The G-CTApp states that the MHRA uses automated electronic communication. To ensure receipt of MHRA correspondence, applicants should add MHRA_CT_Ecomms@mhra.gov.uk to their safe sender email list. MHRA will only send official correspondence to the named applicant email address. According to the MHCTR, if the sponsor or the designated representative does not receive a request for additional information from the MHRA within 30 days, the clinical trial application is treated as authorized.

Regarding the new notification scheme, the G-CTApp states that this pathway enables a more streamlined and risk-proportionate approach to processing clinical trial authorization for “initial” applications for Phase 4 and certain Phase 3 clinical trials deemed to be of lower risk. Applications submitted under this scheme will be processed by the MHRA within 14 calendar days from the application received effective date, provided the sponsor can demonstrate the trial meets the inclusion criteria. Authorization by the MHRA will be granted unless any criterion is not suitably met. If the MHRA determines the application does not meet the criteria, an objection decision will be communicated within 14 calendar days from the application received effective date, and the application will continue under the full authorization assessment with a decision communicated within the 30-day statutory timeframe.

In addition, as stated in the G-CTApp, certain first-in-human (Phase 1) trials of investigational products with higher risk or greater elements of uncertainty require the MHRA to seek advice from the Clinical Trials, Biologicals, and Vaccines Expert Advisory Group (CTBV EAG) of the Commission on Human Medicines (CHM) before approval for the trial can be given. See the G-CTApp for detailed requirements.

Initial Process Review and Timelines

Combined review of clinical trials of investigational medicinal products, New notification scheme, Assessment of your submission, and Applications that need expert advice

Initiation, Agreements & Registration

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Overview

According to the G-CTARevVacBiol, the R-HlthResCoord, and MWI-50, the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA) requires the applicant to obtain PMRA approval and ethics committee (EC) approval before initiating a clinical trial.

The R-HlthResCoord indicates that before submitting a clinical trial application to the PMRA, the sponsor or principal investigator (PI) must obtain full ethical approval from either of the two (2) National Commission for Science and Technology (NCST)-approved ECs—the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) or the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC).

In addition, as per the D-ImprtRelIMPs, the sponsor should not supply the investigational product (IP) to be used in the clinical trial until the sponsor obtains all required documentation. As stated in the G-ImpExpMP, IP import permit applications should be made by the pharmacist of record for the trial. (See the Manufacturing & Import section for additional information.)

Clinical Trial Agreement

The G-CTAProcsVacBiol requires the sponsor to sign a letter of agreement with the participating institution(s) before the trial begins. In addition, the investigators and the sponsor or the contract research organization must sign an agreement specific to the clinical trial.

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 indicates that the sponsor should obtain the investigator’s/institution’s agreement to:

Conduct the trial in compliance with good clinical practice (GCP), with the applicable regulatory requirement(s), and with the approved protocol
Comply with procedures for data recording/reporting
Permit monitoring, auditing, and inspection
Retain the trial related essential documents until the sponsor informs the investigator/institution these documents are no longer needed

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

Clinical Trial Registration

No clinical trials registry exists at this time and there is no stated requirement to register in an international registry.

3

7 (Checklist of Required Documents (Appendices 1, 8, and 10) and CTA Sections 4 and 8)

1, 3.2, and Screening Form

8.0-8.2

3.7

5.6

Last content review/update: January 21, 2025

Overview

In accordance with the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, and GAfREC, a clinical trial can only commence after the sponsor or the designated representative receives authorization from the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and the chief investigator (CI) receives an approval from a recognized ethics committee (EC). In addition, GBR-9 clarifies that a favorable EC opinion does not imply that research activity at sites can begin. Confirmation of management permission or approval from relevant care organization(s) to proceed with the research also needs to be in place. In addition, if the EC issued a favorable opinion with additional conditions, the clinical trial cannot start until these conditions are met. GBR-18 indicates that once all the relevant approvals are in place, all documentation has been finalized, and all participating sites have the information they need, the trial can begin. This process is often achieved by holding a start-up meeting at each site so that the CI ensures all technical aspects of a trial and protocol requirements are fully understood by relevant site staff. Trial-specific training (protocol and procedures) and review of trial conduct (e.g., safety reporting) is often undertaken at this stage. For clinical trials of an investigational product (IP), this communication should also include pharmacy staff, if applicable, so that they can confirm all requirements are in place before dispensing IPs to participants.

See GBR-40 for information about DigiTrials, which supports clinical trials in England to provide safe, authorized access to patient data to help set up trials. DigiTrials includes recruitment and feasibility services to identify whether there are enough suitable participants, as well as participant communication and outcomes services.

Per the MHCTR and GBR-18, specific documentation, including MHRA licensing, must be in place before an IP can be released for a clinical trial.

As stated in the MHCTR, clinical trials should be conducted in compliance with the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), and laboratory practices for IPs must comply with the UK-GLPs. Per the CTIMP-Condtns, MHRA assumes that the trial will commence within 12 months of the date of the favorable ethical opinion. The EC must be notified of the trial start date with evidence of the authorization. Further, the trial should not commence at any site until management permission has been obtained from the organization responsible for the care of the participants at the site. If the trial does not commence within 12 months of the favorable opinion being issued, the sponsor should send the EC a written explanation for the delay. A further written explanation should be sent after 24 months if the research has still not commenced. If the trial does not commence within 24 months of the favorable opinion being issued, the EC may recommend to the MHRA that the clinical trial authorization should be suspended or terminated. See CTIMP-Condtns for additional information on standard conditions for clinical trials.

Per GBR-78, all project-based research must also have governance and legal compliance approvals from the appropriate lead United Kingdom (UK) Health Department. The Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) (GBR-78) facilitates this process. As described in GBR-67, approval from the Health Research Authority (HRA) is required for all National Health Service (NHS) project-based research led from England or Wales. HRA and Health and Care Research Wales (HCRW) approval brings together the assessment of governance and legal compliance. For any new studies that are led from Scotland or Northern Ireland but have English and/or Welsh NHS sites, the national research and development coordinating function of the lead nation will share information with the HRA and HCRW assessment teams, who can issue HRA and HCRW approval for English and Welsh sites and thereby retain existing compatibility arrangements. Studies led from England or Wales with sites in Northern Ireland or Scotland will be supported through existing UK-wide compatibility systems, by which each country accepts the centralized assurances, as far as they apply, from national coordinating functions without unnecessary duplication. For more information on HRA’s assessment criteria and standards for approval, see GBR-29.

Clinical Trial Agreement

According to GBR-107 and GBR-70, contracts and agreements should be in place prior to the initiation of a trial. GBR-107 provides model templates for industry-sponsored clinical trials with the NHS/Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) participants in hospitals throughout the UK Health Services, which encompasses England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. Applicants are advised to use the templates without modification. Any proposed modifications will not be accepted unless first agreed to by the UK Contracting Leads. Proposing modifications to the templates is likely to result in significant delay.

GBR-107 also provides the model non-commercial agreement (mNCA) template to meet the requirements of non-commercial sponsors and the NHS/DHSC bodies undertaking the research. This agreement has been developed as a single, UK-wide agreement template, meaning that it can be used irrespective of where the sponsor and research site are established. It is designed to be used without modification or negotiation. The mNCA has been developed for a range of interventional research scenarios, including clinical trials, medical device studies, research using participant data, and research using human tissue. The terms and conditions are suitable for all such scenarios and only the completion of highlighted sections, including the schedules of the agreement, will differ depending on the study involved.

The UKwide-Rsrch reiterates that national model contracts are available and, as such, contracting expectations and arrangements across the four (4) UK nations are broadly similar. For all four (4) nations:

In commercially sponsored research, it is mandatory to use the unmodified contract templates appropriate to the study type
In non-commercially sponsored research, it is expected that the unmodified contract appropriate to the study type is used; use of bespoke or modified agreements, where an appropriate template exists, is likely to result in significant delay and costly review; any modifications must be highlighted in the application

The UKwide-Rsrch also highlights national differences relating to the way contractual agreements are reviewed and agreed. In England and Wales, sponsors must obtain a waiver from HRA and HCRW to use a modified or bespoke agreement (an agreement that differs from a published UK-wide model agreement template). This waiver allows NHS sites to freely negotiate all the contractual terms of the agreement; in Wales, this negotiation is carried out with a central team. In Northern Ireland, to modify the UK-wide model agreement template, a waiver is needed from the Health and Social Care R&D Approvals Service, which allows sites to freely negotiate all the contractual terms of the agreement. In Scotland, sponsors can expect to carry out a single contract negotiation for all Scottish sites, which will be negotiated with a nominated lead site or central team. If the study is single center, it will be negotiated at the relevant site.

Additional details and templates are available in GBR-107 and GBR-70.

Clinical Trial Registration

As per the GBR-102 and the G-CTApp, the sponsor or investigator is required to register the clinical trial in a publicly accessible database as a condition of a favorable ethical opinion. Registration should occur before the first participant is recruited and no later than six (6) weeks after recruitment of the first participant. To help researchers meet the UK’s transparency requirements, GBR-102 indicates that the HRA will automatically register approved clinical trials with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) Registry (GBR-47) to ensure that information is publicly available. ISRCTN is the UK’s preferred clinical trials registry. HRA’s commitment to register clinical trials on behalf of sponsors and researchers is in line with the “Make It Public” research transparency strategy (see GBR-55).

Per GBR-18, each clinical trial must have a unique trial number. Clinical trials with sites in the European Union (EU), the European Economic Area (EEA), or Northern Ireland should also apply for a European number. Per GBR-87, as of January 31, 2023, all new clinical trials with sites in Europe should register on the new Clinical Trials Information System (CTIS) (GBR-39). GBR-39 specifies that by January 31, 2025, any ongoing trials must be transitioned from EudraCT (GBR-87) to GBR-39. For more information, see the EudraCT transition fact sheet (GBR-16). CTIMP-Condtns indicates that for clinical trials involving sites in both the UK and the EU, a record in EU’s GBR-39 does not satisfy the public registry condition because the UK component of the trial will not be visible in CTIS (GBR-39). Failure to register is a breach of the clinical trial conditions unless a deferral has been agreed to.

Per GBR-102, HRA also recognizes any registry covered by the World Health Organization (WHO) or the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), such as clinicaltrials.gov (GBR-49). For any submissions prior to December 31, 2021, the applicant should have registered their clinical trial on an established international register.

6

Terminology (Glossary) and Sections 1, 3, and 14

1.17, 5.1.2, and 8.2.6

About NHS DigiTrials and NHS DigiTrials - our services

CI Checklist Before Seeking Approval, CTA Submission, Final Trial Management Documentation, Trial Registration, and Trial Begins

Help (Preparing and Submitting Applications)

2-3

3.2

Registration of your clinical trial, Combined review of clinical trials of investigational medicinal products, Documents to send with your application, and Assessment of your submission

7

Amendment of Regulation 12 of the Principal Regulations; and Part 2 (Conditions Based on Article 3 of the Directive)

Part 3 (12, 13, and 18)

Contracting Arrangements

Safety Reporting

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Safety Reporting Definitions

In accordance with the G-SAEs-PMRA, the following definitions provide a basis for a common understanding of Malawi’s safety reporting requirements:

Adverse Event (AE) – Any AE associated with the use of a medicine in humans, and which does not necessarily bear a causal relationship to the treatment. This may include an AE occurring in the following circumstances: during use in professional practice; from an overdose, whether accidental or intentional; from drug abuse; from drug withdrawal; and as a result of any failure of expected pharmacological action.
Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) – A reaction characterized by the suspicion of a causal relationship between the drug and the occurrence.
Serious Adverse Event (SAE) or Serious Adverse Drug Reaction (SADR) – An adverse experience occurring at any dose that results in death, is life-threatening, requires or extends patient hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability, is a birth defect or congenital anomaly; or is an important medical event that, based upon appropriate medical judgment, may jeopardize the participant, and may require intervention to prevent one (1) of the listed outcomes.

Safety Reporting Requirements

As stated in the G-SAEs-PMRA, the sponsor or the investigator(s) is required to report all SAEs that meet the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA)’s reporting requirements as soon as possible (within 24-72 hours) following site awareness using the SAE Form (MWI-12). All deaths that are assessed as definitely, probably, or possibly related must be reported to the PMRA within 24 hours of site awareness, and the SAE Form (MWI-12) must be submitted within three (3) working days of site awareness. See the G-SAEs-PMRA for additional details on reporting timelines for different reportable SAE situations.

The G-NHSRC indicates that the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) requires the investigator to submit a written report for any occurrence of an AE. In the event of documented SAEs and any unanticipated problems as documented by the researcher, the NHSRC must terminate the study and order the investigator to follow up with study participants. Per the G-COMREC, AE and SAE reports must also be submitted to the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC).

Form Completion & Delivery Requirements

As per the G-SAEs-PMRA, all SAEs that meet reporting requirements must be reported to the PMRA on an SAE Form (MWI-12). The G-SAEs-PMRA indicates that the form must be submitted to the PMRA office by email or hand delivered to the offices at the following address:

The Director General
Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority
P.O. Box 30241
Lilongwe 3, Malawi
Tel: 265-1755166/165
Email: info@pmra.mw, registration@pmra.mw

According to the G-NHSRC, AE reports submitted to the NHSRC must provide the following details:

Title of protocol
NHSRC assigned reference number
Name of investigator
Local affiliating institution for studies originating from outside Malawi
Subject identifier
Date and site/place of event
Description of event (i.e., nature of injury or other adverse occurrence, assessment of severity, and assessment of relationship of the event to the study)
Action taken by the researcher
Signature of the principal investigator (PI)

See MWI-2 for the NHSRC SAE Reporting Form.

6.0

5.7-5.8

1 and 2

Last content review/update: October 25, 2024

Safety Reporting Definitions

According to GBR-1 and GBR-64, the following definitions provide a basis for a common understanding of the United Kingdom’s (UK’s) safety reporting requirements:

Adverse Event or Adverse Experience (AE) – Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant, including occurrences which are not necessarily caused by or related to that product
Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) – Any untoward and unintended response in a participant to an investigational medicinal product which is related to any dose administered to that participant
Serious Adverse Event (SAE), Serious Adverse Drug Reaction (SADR), or Unexpected SADR – Any AE, ADR, or unexpected ADR that results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect
Unexpected Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) – An adverse reaction where the nature or severity is inconsistent with the applicable product information
Suspected Unexpected Serious Adverse Reaction (SUSAR) – A suspected serious adverse reaction, which is also “unexpected,” meaning that its nature and severity are not consistent with the information about the medicinal product in question

Per the G-CTAuth-GBR, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) advises that the guidance on reference safety information (RSI) contained in GBR-30 (developed by the Clinical Trials Facilitation Group of the Heads of Medicines Agencies (HMA)) remains applicable. For clinical trials that are being conducted in the UK, an RSI cannot be used for expectedness until the RSI has been approved by the MHRA. Additional SUSARs that occur before the new RSI is approved should be reported in the usual expedited manner. If sponsors wish to harmonize the implementation date of an RSI in a trial that includes European Union (EU) and UK sites, then they can use the date when approval is granted in all member states and the UK. In the interest of efficiency and harmonization for multinational trials, the MHRA recommends that amendments including changes to the RSI are submitted to the UK and EU at the same time. The RSI in place at the time the SUSAR occurred should be used to assess expectedness for follow-up reports.

Safety Reporting Requirements

Per GBR-99, a sponsor or investigator may take appropriate urgent safety measures (USMs) to protect research participants against any immediate hazard to their health or safety, without prior authorization from a regulatory body. The main ethics committee (EC), and the MHRA for clinical trials for investigational medicinal products (CTIMPs), must be notified immediately (no later than three (3) days) in the form of a substantial amendment that such measures have been taken and the reasons why. GBR-9 states that for trials which have been submitted via the combined review service, one USM notification is made via the combined review part of the Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) (GBR-125) and received by the MHRA. No additional notification is required directly to the EC. GBR-32 reaffirms this stating that SUSARs and safety reports for CTIMPs that were approved by combined review should be submitted to the MHRA only. If the safety report requires action, the MHRA will instruct the study team to submit a substantial amendment. Any other SUSARs or annual safety report submitted UK wide will be acknowledged by email by the EC. The submitted cover report for the SUSAR or annual safety report will not be signed and returned, and the email will act as the formal acknowledgement.

In addition, the G-CTAuth-GBR states that the sponsor should call the MHRA’s Clinical Trials Unit at 020 3080 6456 to discuss the issue with a safety scientist, ideally within 24 hours of measures being taken, but no later than three (3) days. If key details are not available during the initial call, then the sponsor should inform the MHRA no later than three (3) days from the date the measures are taken by email to clintrialhelpline@mhra.gov.uk. Written notification in the form of a substantial amendment is also required. The substantial amendment covering the changes made as part of the USM is anticipated within approximately two (2) weeks of notification to the MHRA. Any potential reason for delay of substantial amendment submission should be discussed and agreed upon with the MHRA at the time of initial notification or through a follow-up call. Submission of the substantial amendment must not be delayed by additional changes outside of those taken and required as an urgent safety measure. Unrelated and unacceptable changes may result in rejection. For more details on how submissions should be made using MHRA Submissions, see G-CTAuth-GBR.

Investigator Responsibilities

As specified in the MHCTR, GBR-1, and GBR-30, the investigator is responsible for reporting all SAEs/SADRs immediately to the sponsor. The report may be made orally or in writing and followed by a detailed report no later than 24 hours after the event. When the reported event results in a participant’s death, the investigator must provide the sponsor with any requested information. According to the MHCTR, in cases where reporting is not immediately required according to the protocol or the Investigator’s Brochure (IB), the investigator should report an SAE/SADR within the appropriate timeframe based on the trial requirements, the seriousness of the SAE/SADR, and protocol or IB guidelines. Per GBR-1, the investigator and the sponsor share responsibility for the assessment and evaluation of adverse events with regard to seriousness, causality, and expectedness.

See GBR-18 for a safety reporting flowchart that gives an overview of the investigator’s expedited safety reporting requirements to the sponsor for a clinical trial in the UK.

Sponsor Responsibilities

According to the MHCTR, the G-CTAuth-GBR, and the MHCTR-EUExit, the sponsor is required to record and report all relevant information about fatal or life-threatening SUSARs as soon as possible, but no later than seven (7) calendar days to the MHRA, to the institution in which the trial is being conducted, and to the EC. Any additional relevant information should be sent within eight (8) days of the initial report. The sponsor must also report any non-fatal or non-life threatening SUSARs no later than 15 calendar days following first awareness of the event. Per GBR-1, the investigator and the sponsor share responsibility for the assessment and evaluation of adverse events with regard to seriousness, causality, and expectedness. Per the G-CTAuth-GBR, sponsors must report all UK-relevant SUSARs to the MHRA. The agency’s definition of ‘UK-relevant’ includes:

SUSARs originating in the UK for a trial
SUSARs originating outside the UK for a trial
If the sponsor is serving as a sponsor of another ongoing trial outside the UK involving the same medicinal product
SUSARs involving the same medicinal product if the sponsor of the trial outside the UK is either part of the same mother company or develops the medicinal product jointly, on the basis of a formal agreement, with the UK sponsor

Per GBR-18, sponsors should develop formal, written processes for the management of adverse events and safety reports, including the handling of both expedited reports and annual safety reporting.

Other Safety Reports

Per the G-CTAuth-GBR, sponsors must submit Development Safety Update Reports (DSURs) to the MHRA. The DSUR should consider all new available safety information received during the reporting period. The DSUR should include:

A cover letter listing all relevant clinical trial numbers of trials covered by the DSUR and an email address for correspondence (Note: per GBR-18, every clinical trial with a European site must include a European number. GBR-87 indicates that as of January 31, 2023, all new clinical trials with sites in Europe should use the Clinical Trials Information System (CTIS) (GBR-39)
An analysis of the participant’s safety in the concerned clinical trial(s) with an appraisal of its ongoing risk/benefit
A listing of all suspected serious adverse reactions (including all SUSARs) that occurred in the trial(s)
An aggregate summary tabulation of SUSARs that occurred in the concerned trial(s)

As stated in the G-CTAuth-GBR, at the end of the DSUR reporting period, the sponsor may assess the new safety information that has been generated and submit any proposed safety changes to the IB as a substantial amendment. This amendment must be supported by the DSUR and approved before the RSI is changed. A shortened DSUR is available for approved trials under MHRA’s notification scheme that are not part of a multi-study development program. Phase 4 national (UK only) trials of licensed products, which commanded a low fee from the MHRA, and where all participants have completed treatment and are only in the follow-up stage will also be suitable for submission of a short format DSUR. As an alternative to producing a full DSUR for these trials, the Health Research Authority Annual Progress Report (GBR-27) may be used.

The MHRA and Health Canada jointly released DSUR-UK_Canada to strengthen participant safety in clinical trials by improving the quality of DSURs. To increase the transparency of the data included in DSURs, the MHRA and Health Canada are requiring that the region-specific section of the DSUR explain how safety data were reviewed during the reporting period. Specifically, the region-specific section of the DSUR should include a summary description of the processes used by the sponsor to review the worldwide safety data of the investigational product (IP) (e.g., regular analyses of accumulating data, in-house safety review meetings, proposal of specific pharmacovigilance activities, or substantial modifications of the protocol). In addition, the region-specific section must describe how each safety signal (i.e., an event with an unknown causal relationship to the IP) identified during the reporting period was evaluated, as well as how a decision was made regarding the signal itself.

See the G-CTAuth-GBR, the MHCTR, GBR-1, GBR-18, GBR-30, and GBR-99 for detailed reporting requirements for the investigator and sponsor.

Form Completion & Delivery Requirements

Per the G-CTAuth-GBR, SUSARs during clinical trials should be reported to the MHRA in one (1) of the following ways:

Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSR) Submissions (GBR-126) (which replaces the EudraVigilance website (EVWEB)) – The ICSR Submissions route is used to submit single reports. (Note that per GBR-127, MHRA also decommissioned the eSUSAR reporting platform.)
MHRA Gateway (which replaces the EudraVigilance Gateway) – To gain access to the MHRA Gateway, which is used to submit bulk reports, users must first register via MHRA Submissions (GBR-13). The steps for gaining access to MHRA Submissions are contained within the G-MHRASubmiss and GBR-11.

See the Regulatory Fees section for information on fees for annual safety reporting and DSURs. See the G-CTAuth-GBR and GBR-99 for more details on submittal and delivery requirements.

4 and 5

10

Changes to SUSARs and annual safety reports

CI Checklist Before Seeking Approval, Trial Registration, Safety Reporting, and Urgent Safety Measures

SUSAR

Reference Safety Information – updated guidance, Suspected Unexpected Serious Adverse Reactions (SUSARs), Development Safety Update Reports (DSURs), and Urgent Safety Measures

14

Part 5

Progress Reporting

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Interim and Annual Progress Reports

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 notes that the investigator should promptly provide written reports to the sponsor and the institutional ethics committee (EC) on any changes significantly affecting the conduct of the trial, and/or increasing the risk to participants.

According to the G-NHSRC, the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) requires an initial submission of a progress report within three (3) months of approval of the study, and an annual report for medium to long-term studies.

The G-COMREC requires that the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC) follow the progress of studies for which a positive decision has been reached and establish a subcommittee responsible for monitoring ongoing studies. As part of the monitoring process, every approved study must submit annual reports by November 30, regardless of the date of its approval.

As required in MWI-58, the principal investigator (PI) must submit an annual progress report to the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA). All sections of the Clinical Trial Annual Progress Reporting Form for Investigators (MWI-58) must be completed in typescript and submitted together with accompanying documents to the PMRA Director General at info@pmra.mw. Both hard and soft (electronic) copies must be submitted.

The G-NHSRC and the G-COMREC further state that all approved studies continuing for more than one (1) year are subject to continuing review by the approving EC. As part of this review, applicant(s) are required to submit a progress report describing the number of participants enrolled, any problems that occurred during the prior approval period, any new knowledge regarding the study, and any procedural changes.

See MWI-54 and MWI-8 for the NHSRC and COMREC report forms, respectively.

Final Report

As required by the G-NHSRC and the G-COMREC, the applicant is required to submit a final report to the approving EC when a study is completed.

According to the G-NHSRC, the investigator must submit three (3) copies of the final technical report when submitting written notice of the completion of the study to NHSRC.

Other Considerations

The G-NHSRC states that all data originating from a research study conducted in Malawi are the property of the Malawi Government irrespective of the source of funds for carrying out the study. Therefore, investigators are required to submit copies of their reports to NHSRC for review prior to submitting for publication within or outside of Malawi. Investigators are expected to have plans for disseminating research findings in Malawi.

5.5 and 6.0

5.1, 5.6, and 11

4.10 and 4.13

Last content review/update: October 25, 2024

Interim and Annual Progress Reports

As indicated in the G-CTAuth-GBR and GBR-9, the investigator and the sponsor share responsibility for submitting progress reports to the ethics committee (EC), as required, on the status of a clinical trial and for submitting a final study report upon the trial’s completion. These requirements comply with the progress and final reporting requirements delineated in the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113).

In accordance with GBR-32 and GBR-65, it is no longer a requirement to submit annual progress reports to the EC. However, GBR-65 states that depending on the type of approval, a progress report may be requested to track progress.

In addition, GBR-65 states that if the study was reviewed by an EC in Scotland or Northern Ireland, an annual progress report should be submitted 12 months after the date on which the favorable ethics opinion was given, except in the following instances:

If the study is expected to run for less than two (2) years in duration
If the study received a proportionate review
If the study received a favorable ethics opinion from an EC in England or Wales

Furthermore, GBR-65, states that if a study was given a favorable ethics opinion by an EC in Scotland or Northern Ireland, there are separate forms for submitting progress reports, depending on the type of research. The form for clinical trials of investigational medicinal products (GBR-27) should be completed in typescript and authorized by the Chief Investigator (CI) or the sponsor/sponsor representative. An electronic copy should be emailed to the EC within 30 days of the end of the reporting period.

See the Regulatory Fees section for information on fees for annual progress reports.

Final Report

As per the MHCTR and the G-CTAuth-GBR, the sponsor must notify the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and the EC in writing that a clinical trial has ended within 90 days of the conclusion of the trial. As indicated in GBR-128, all project-based research (not research tissue banks or research databases) that has been reviewed by an EC needs to submit a final report within 12 months of the end of the study. The final report should be completed and submitted in the combined review part of Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) (GBR-125). When completing the final report form, IRAS guides the user with instructions next to each question.

The G-CTAuth-GBR further specifies that a declaration of the end of a clinical trial should be sent to the MHRA within 90 days of the global end of the trial and within 15 days of the global premature end of the trial. The submission must include an end of trial form (GBR-133) and a cover letter. Note that only the global end-of-trial notification is required to be submitted. However, a facility may inform the MHRA of the local (UK) end of trial via the end-of-trial notification form, but these local notifications will not be officially acknowledged and the MHRA Submissions automatic email confirmation should be considered as evidence of submission. If a local end of trial is submitted, the MHRA would still expect to receive relevant safety updates and substantial amendments for the ongoing trial until the global end of trial notification is received. An exemption to this requirement must be requested via a substantial amendment for approval. The amendment must clearly state to what documents the proposal relates and provide a robust rationale for the request. All safety documentation must be submitted unless there are no other trials ongoing with the same product in the UK. Any trial activities (such as follow-ups, visits) must be completed before the submission of the global end-of-trial declaration form. It is not possible to submit amendments to the trial or the Development Safety Update Report (DSUR) once the global end-of-trial declaration form has been received by the MHRA. If the end-of-trial declaration has been received within a reporting period, or within 60 days following the data lock point, the corresponding DSUR will not be required.

Per the G-CTAuth-GBR, the timeframe for publishing the summary of results is within one (1) year of the end of trial. Sponsors should publish summary results within this timeframe in the public register(s) where they registered the clinical trial. While it is not required to submit this clinical trial summary report to the MHRA, sponsors must send a short confirmation email to CT.Submission@mhra.gov.uk once the results-related information has been uploaded to the public register and provide the relevant link.

As per GBR-9, the investigator is also required to submit a summary of the final study report to the main EC within one (1) year of the trial’s conclusion. GBR-20 clarifies that the form in GBR-20 should be used for this submittal, which includes submitting a lay summary of results. This is a UK-wide final report for all project-based research studies that have been reviewed by an EC within the UK Health Departments’ Research Ethics Service (GBR-62). The information contained in this final report helps the Research Ethics Service to monitor whether the research was conducted in accordance with the EC’s favorable opinion and applicable transparency requirements. Per the GBR-120, sponsors should include a plain language summary of their findings in the final report, which will be published on HRA’s website alongside the study research summaries. See GBR-120 for guidance on writing a good plain language summary for a general audience.

Per the G-PIPs, UK marketing authorization holders who sponsor a study that involves the use of the authorized medicinal product in the pediatric population, must submit to the MHRA results of the study within six (6) months after the trial ended. Additional requirements and submittal details are in the G-PIPs and the G-PIPsProcess.

Terminology (Glossary), and Sections 1 and 14

4.10 and 4.13

Final report on the research

End of Trial

Legal Background and Scope

Part 3 (Section 27)

Definition of Sponsor

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

As per the D-ImprtRelIMPs and the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22), a sponsor is defined as an individual, company, institution, or organization that takes responsibility for the initiation, management, and/or financing of a clinical trial. Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow MWI-22. MWI-22 goes on to specify that a sponsor-investigator is an individual who both initiates and conducts, alone or with others, a clinical trial, and under whose immediate direction the investigational product is administered to, dispensed to, or used by a participant. The term does not include any person other than an individual (e.g., it does not include a corporation or an agency). The obligations of a sponsor-investigator include both those of a sponsor and those of an investigator.

In accordance with MWI-22, a sponsor may 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.

A sponsor may be domestic or foreign. As specified in the R-HlthResCoord, a sponsor that is a foreign company, organization, or individual(s), must first be affiliated with a local Malawian institution that is recognized by the National Commission for Science and Technology (NCST) prior to commencing any operations in the country.

7

10.0

1.53, 1.54, 5.1, and 5.2

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

New Info (Not Yet in Profile)

On April 10, 2025, the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) (Amendment) Regulations 2024 was signed into law. There is a 12-month implementation period before the amended regulations come fully into force on April 10, 2026. For more information, see the Health Research Authority news update.

As per the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, the G-CTApp, GBR-103, GBR-9, GBR-2, and the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), the sponsor is defined as an individual, company, institution, or organization who takes ultimate responsibility for the initiation, management, and financing (or arranging the financing) of a trial. The sponsor must ensure that the trial design meets appropriate standards and arrange for the trial to be properly conducted and reported. In addition, per GBR-101, the sponsor is the individual, organization, or partnership that takes on overall responsibility for proportionate, effective arrangements being in place to set up, run, and report a research project.

In accordance with GBR-113, the United Kingdom (UK) also permits a sponsor to transfer any or all of its trial-related duties and functions to a contract research organization (CRO) and/or institutional site(s). However, the ultimate responsibility for the trial data’s quality and integrity always resides with the sponsor. Any trial-related responsibilities transferred to a CRO should be specified in a written agreement. The CRO should implement quality assurance and quality control. Per the G-CTApp, G-SubtlAmndmt, and the GBR-103, the clinical trial sponsor or legal representative needs to be established in the UK or a country on an approved country list which initially includes the European Union (EU)/European Economic Area (EEA) countries per G-CTApprovedCountries. A change in sponsor or legal representative for a UK trial is a substantial amendment requiring submission to both the MHRA and the ethics committee. GBR-103 specifies that the legal representative:

May be an individual person or a representative of a corporate entity
Does not have to be a legally qualified person
Should be willing to act as the agent of the sponsor in the event of any legal proceedings instituted (e.g., for service of legal documents)
Should be established at an address in the UK or a country on the approved country list
Does not assume any of the legal liabilities of the sponsor(s) for the trial by virtue of the role of legal representative and does not therefore require insurance or indemnity to meet such liabilities; but may, in some cases, enter into specific contractual arrangements to undertake some or all of the statutory duties of the sponsor in relation to the trial, in which case the legal representative would also be regarded as a co-sponsor and would then require insurance or indemnity cover

The MHCTR also permits two (2) or more parties to take responsibility for the sponsor’s functions. When this applies, the MHCTR requires one (1) of the parties to submit the clinical trial application for authorization to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), and to specify who is responsible for carrying out the following functions:

Communications relating to substantial amendments, modified amendments, and trial conclusion
Communications relating to urgent safety measures
Pharmacovigilance reporting

Basic Principles

Terminology (Statutory Definitions Relating to CTIMPs)

5.1 and 5.2

Responsibilities (9.10)

Changes to the trial sponsor/legal representative

2

Trial Sponsor and legal Representative

Amendment of Regulation 3 of the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Regulation 12 of the Principal Regulations; and Part 2 (Conditions Based on Article 3 of the Directive)

Part 1 (3)

Site/Investigator Selection

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Overview

The G-CTAProcsVacBiol specifies that the investigator(s) must be qualified, experienced, and have specific good clinical practice (GCP) training. The principal investigator (PI) should have acted as a sub-investigator in at least one (1) prior clinical study. The investigator must also commit to complying with the clinical trial protocol, have no conflicts of interest, and have no history of GCP noncompliance.

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 provides the following guidance to sponsors on investigator and site selection:

The sponsor is responsible for selecting the investigator(s)/institution(s). Each investigator should be qualified by training and experience and should have adequate resources to properly conduct the trial for which the investigator is selected. If organization of a coordinating committee and/or selection of coordinating investigator(s) are to be utilized in multicenter trials, their organization and/or selection are the sponsor’s responsibility.
Before entering an agreement with an investigator/institution to conduct a trial, the sponsor should provide the investigator(s)/institution(s) with the protocol and an up-to-date Investigator’s Brochure, and should provide sufficient time for the investigator/institution to review the protocol and the information provided.

As stated in the G-CTAProcsVacBiol, all clinical trials must also be conducted in a laboratory that can provide evidence of accreditation with a recognized control authority to conduct the specified test. In the absence of an accreditation authority, proof of Good Laboratory Practice compliance and validation of assay methods should be provided.

Foreign Sponsor Responsibilities

According to the G-NHSRC, foreign researchers must be affiliated to a local institution and provide a supporting letter from the institution as evidence. Additionally, they must have a local collaborator. The R-HlthResCoord further indicates that any foreign-based institution or organization must first be affiliated with a local Malawian institution that is recognized by the National Commission for Science and Technology (NCST) prior to commencing any operations in the country.

Data and Safety Monitoring Board

Although not specified as a sponsor requirement, the G-CTAProcsVacBiol states that a Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) or a similar body must be established and empowered to regularly assess the trial and to recommend a pause or termination of the trial for safety reasons. MWI-22 notes 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.

Multicenter Studies

As delineated in MWI-22, in the event of a multicenter clinical trial, the sponsor must ensure that:

All investigators conduct the trial in strict compliance with the protocol agreed to by the sponsor, and given ethics committee (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

7 (Checklist of Required Documents (Appendices 8 and 10) and CTA Sections 4 and 8)

5.1

10

1.25, 5.5, 5.6, and 5.23

Last content review/update: January 21, 2025

Overview

As set forth in the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), the sponsor is responsible for selecting the investigator(s) and the institution(s) for the clinical trial, taking into account the appropriateness and availability of the study site and facilities. The MHCTR2006 indicates that the sponsor must also ensure that the investigator(s) are qualified by training and experience. Additionally, the sponsor must define and allocate all study related duties and responsibilities to the relevant parties participating in the study. GBR-9 states that the chief investigator (CI) should be based in the United Kingdom (UK). In rare cases when this is not required, adequate arrangements must be in place for supervision of the study in the UK.

As delineated in the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, and GBR-113, prior to entering into an agreement with the investigator(s) and the institution(s) to conduct a study, the sponsor should provide the investigator(s) with the protocol and an investigator’s brochure. Per GBR-113, if a multicenter trial is going to be conducted, the sponsor must organize a coordinating committee or select coordinating investigators. Per GBR-18, for clinical trials of investigational products (CTIMPs) conducted at National Health Service (NHS) sites, the addition of a new site and/or addition or change of a principal investigator (PI) is no longer considered a substantial amendment. No changes have been made to the classification of amendments relating to new sites/change of PI at non-NHS sites. If a site is added in a nation not previously involved in a study, this should be indicated in the combined review section (GBR-125) of the Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) for CTIMPs, and made clear in a cover letter when submitting the amendment to the lead nation.

UK Local Information Pack

GBR-113 recommends establishing a Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) 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 GBR-63, researchers working with NHS/Health and Social Care in Northern Ireland (HSC) organizations across England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales should use the UK Local Information Pack (LIP), which provides one (1) consistent package to support study setup and delivery across the UK.

The UKwide-Rsrch explains the LIP ensures that consistent information is given to all UK research sites and indicates that there are national differences in the LIP. In England and Wales, the LIP should include the Initial Assessment Letter, which may be shared with sites. Additionally, the sponsor should send the LIP directly to the site’s Research and Development (R&D) department, delivery team, and local clinical research network (if a National Institute for Health and Care Research Clinical Research Network (NIHR CRN) Portfolio) using the England and Wales non-commercial email template or commercial email template, as appropriate. For Welsh sites, it is expected that the sponsor has a process to translate patient-facing documents into the Welsh language if requested by sites or participants. In Northern Ireland, the sponsor may send the LIP to each participating site’s R&D department and delivery team once the application has been validated and once instructed to do so by the Health and Social Care R&D Approvals Service. The LIP should be shared using the Northern Ireland non-commercial email template or commercial email template, as appropriate. In Scotland, the NHS Research Scotland Permissions Coordinating Centre makes the LIP available to participating R&D departments and the appropriate Network or Portfolio Manager. The sponsor is responsible for making the information available to the research teams using the Scotland email template, which covers both non-commercial and commercial studies.

For help with LIP packages, email templates and other requirements, see GBR-106.

Foreign Sponsor Responsibilities

GBR-103 provides that if a sponsor(s) is not established in the UK or on an approved country list (which initially includes European Union (EU)/European Economic Area (EEA) countries), it is a statutory requirement to appoint a legal representative based in the UK or a country on the approved country list for the purposes of the trial. Per the G-CTApprovedCountries, the UK published a list of countries where a sponsor of a clinical trial, or their legal representative, may be established; currently listed countries are those in the EU and EEA. The G-SubtlAmndmt delineates that a change in sponsor or legal representative for a UK trial is a substantial amendment requiring submission to both the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and the ethics committee (EC), pursuant to the guidelines in the G-CTAuth-GBR. Where the sponsor is from the rest of the world, and the legal representative is established in the UK, and there are sites in the EU/EEA, the sponsor will need to assign an EU/EEA legal representative for these sites via a substantial amendment to the relevant EU/EEA competent authorities. No amendment submission to the MHRA is required where the sponsor or legal representative for an ongoing trial is established in the EU/EEA as the UK will continue to accept this approval. Further, no amendment will need to be submitted in the UK if the sponsor retains the UK legal representative for the UK study. Similarly, no amendment will need to be submitted in the UK if a sponsor remains in the UK and a legal representative is added to cover EU/EEA sites.

Additional foreign sponsor requirements are listed in Section 5.2 of GBR-113.

Data Safety and Monitoring Board

Per GBR-18, the chief investigator should ensure that arrangements are made for a data safety and monitoring board (known as a data monitoring committee (DMC) in the UK). GBR-113 recommends establishing a DMC 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.

Multicenter Studies

Per GBR-18, for multicenter trials, the careful selection and evaluation of investigator sites is critical for the successful completion of a trial within budget, timelines, and to ensure the generation of high-quality data. When undertaking site selection, the preparation of ‘reserve’ investigator sites (so that the trial may be extended to these sites if recruitment issues arise) should be considered as part of proactive trial planning. Factors that should influence investigator site selection include:

Interest in the research question
Experience and qualifications of the investigator
Sufficient staff to conduct the study and their experience and qualifications
Availability of a suitable patient population
Adequate time to conduct and oversee the trial
Adequate facilities
Previous track record with similar trials
Geographic location
Contractual and budgetary negotiations and arrangements

Per GBR-18, for multicenter trials, the CI must ensure that each PI is provided with all relevant, version-controlled documents before commencing recruitment. Further, it is good practice to ensure the PI signs a protocol signature page to confirm receipt and their agreement to comply with the current version of the protocol. The trial master file should be held at the coordinating site and copies of relevant documents should be kept at each participating site in an investigator site file.

Further, as delineated in GBR-113, in the event of a multicenter clinical trial, the sponsor must ensure that:

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

1.1

5.23, 5.5, 5.6, 6, and 7

CI Checklist Before Seeking Approval, Addition of New Sites & Investigators, Final Trial Management Documentation, Feasibility & Investigator Selection, Final Protocol, and Trial Master File

Preparing and Submitting Application (Site-specific information)

Changes to the trial sponsor/legal representative

2

Amending your trial protocol or other documentation

Insertion of Regulation 3A of the Principal Regulations, Insertion of Regulation 29A of the Principal Regulations, and Part 2 (Principles based on Articles 2 to 5 of the GCP Directive)

Part 1 (3) and Part 3 (15)

Providing the UK Local Information Pack

Insurance & Compensation

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Insurance

As set forth in the G-CTInsurance-MWI, the G-CTAProcsVacBiol, the G-CTARevVacBiol, and the G-COMREC, the sponsor or the investigator(s) are responsible for providing insurance coverage for any unforeseen injury to research participants. Before a clinical trial begins, the sponsor should also provide insurance or indemnify the investigator and the institution against claims arising from malpractice or negligence. See the G-CTInsurance-MWI, the G-CTAProcsVacBiol, the G-CTARevVacBiol, and the G-COMREC for detailed information on when insurance is required.

As per the G-CTInsurance-MWI, the sponsor or the investigator(s) must provide the participants with a no-fault insurance policy and certificate for the duration of the trial, and for five (5) years following the trial’s completion. “No-fault” is defined as insurance for which proof of negligence or other wrongful conduct need not be established. However, the causal connection between the trial and harm, bodily injury, or death must be proven to trigger the obligation to make a compensation payment. The National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC), the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC), or the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA)'s Clinical Trial Review Committee are responsible for determining which clinical trials fall within the scope of this requirement.

Per the G-CTInsurance-MWI, obtaining and submitting insurance is a requirement and a prerequisite to obtaining clinical trial ethics and regulatory approval. The insurance documentation must be included as part of the application package submitted to either the NHSRC or COMREC, and the PMRA. As specified in the G-CTAProcsVacBiol, the sponsor or the investigator(s) must also comply with the insurance and compensation requirements delineated in the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry’s guidelines (MWI-21 and MWI-20).

The PMRA’s Indemnity Form for Conducting Clinical Trials (Form CT 10) is available at MWI-18.

Compensation

Injury or Death

As specified in the G-CTInsurance-MWI, the G-CTAProcsVacBiol, and the G-COMREC, 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 MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 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.

As per the G-CTAProcsVacBiol, the sponsor must follow the principles set forth in the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry’s guidelines (MWI-21 and MWI-20) to comply with Malawi’s participant compensation and treatment requirements due to 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 the legal heirs in the event of trial-related injuries or death. The investigator, in turn, communicates this information to the relevant ethics committees (ECs).

MWI-21 provides several basic principles to guide sponsors in fulfilling their compensation obligations. Compensation should be paid as follows:

When it can be demonstrated that a causal relationship exists between a participant’s injury and participation in a trial
When a child is injured in utero through participation by the child’s mother in a clinical trial
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

MWI-21 states that 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. The amount of compensation 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.

According to MWI-21, 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

Per MWI-21, 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 the opinion of a mutually acceptable independent expert at the sponsor’s own cost. 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 MWI-21, 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

Per G-BioSampCompense, participants may also be reimbursed for trial-related expenses, if allowed by the EC. However, payments to participants that are construed to affect the voluntary participation of the subjects are not allowed. Furthermore, lump sum payments for research participation are not allowed. Participants who incur direct costs from trial participation must be reimbursed if required by the EC. Such reimbursable expenses include travel and communications costs associated with routine clinical trial evaluations. During review of the protocol, the EC will make a case-by-case determination if the study should provide any form of acceptable recompense.

(b)(ii) and (b)(iii)

9.0

7 (Checklist of Required Documents (Appendix 9), CTA Section 5, CTA Section 9, and Check of Appended Documents (Appendix 9))

1, 2, 3.2, and Screening Form

1.0-3.0 and 7.0

3 and 4

4.8 and 5.8

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Insurance

As set forth in the MHCTR and the MHCTR2006, it is a legal requirement for an insurance and indemnity provision to be made to cover the liability of the investigator and sponsor for trial-related injuries. The MHCTR does not ascribe responsibility to the sponsor or the designated representative to obtain insurance and indemnity. However, GBR-2, GBR-103, GBR-101, and GBR-18 state that the sponsor or the designated representative is responsible for ensuring adequate insurance and indemnity arrangements are in place to cover the sponsor’s and the investigator’s potential liability, and for providing a copy of this coverage in the clinical trial application submission.

In addition, according to GBR-2, the sponsor or the designated representative must ensure that the research covered by the National Health Service (NHS)’s indemnity policy is in place for each publicly funded participating study site. See GBR-33 for detailed information on the NHS indemnity responsibilities for clinical negligence involving investigators and participants. GBR-33, specifically addresses the sponsor’s or the designated representative’s requirement to insure or indemnify the investigator participating in industry-sponsored Phase 1 clinical trials.

The International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113) also guides sponsors on providing insurance.

Compensation

Injury or Death

As specified in the MHCTR, the sponsor or the designated representative is responsible for providing compensation to research participants and/or their legal heirs in the event of Phase 1 trial-related injuries or death. According to GBR-33, the sponsor must have agreed with the research participant to provide compensation for injury whenever a causal relationship with participation is demonstrated. This undertaking can be provided directly by the sponsor through the consent process, or through authorizing the contract research organization (CRO) or investigator on behalf of the sponsor. In addition, the sponsor should follow these practices:

If the health or wellbeing of the participant deteriorates significantly as a result of taking part in the study, the sponsor will compensate the volunteer, irrespective of the ability of the participant to prove fault on the part of the sponsor or anyone else connected with the study.
The amount of compensation should be calculated by reference to the amount of damages that would commonly have been awarded for similar injuries by an English court had liability been proven. The amount of compensation may be reduced if the volunteer is partly responsible for the injury or if the volunteer is separately compensated under any other insurance policy.
The sponsor and participant agree to refer any dispute about whether compensation is payable or the amount of such compensation to an arbitrator with power to consult a barrister of 10 years’ standing on any issue of law, including the amount of damages to be paid.
Participants should be given a copy of the relevant Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) guidelines and should be invited to seek clarification of any aspect of the undertaking that is not clear to them.
Participants may make a claim through the investigator, and the sponsor should aim to respond sympathetically and promptly.

GBR-113 also 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.

3, 4, and 6

Introduction and Basic Principles

5.8

CI Checklist Before Seeking Approval (Trial Planning Phase) and Final Trial Management Documentation

Responsibilities

Part 2 (Conditions Based on Article 3 of the Directive)

Part 3 (15), Part 4 (8), and Schedule 1 (Part 1 (1) and (16))

Risk & Quality Management

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Quality Assurance/Quality Control

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 guides sponsors on quality, data, and records management.

Per MWI-22, 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, identification of processes and data that are critical to ensure participant protection and the reliability of trial results
Identification of risks to critical trial processes and data
Evaluation of the identified risks against existing risk controls
Decisions on which risks to reduce and/or which risks to accept
Documentation of quality management activities and communication to those involved in or affected by these activities
Periodic review of risk control measures to ascertain whether the implemented quality management activities are effective and relevant
In the clinical study report, a description of the quality management approach implemented in the trial and a summary of important deviations from the predefined quality tolerance limits and remedial actions taken

Monitoring Requirements

As part of its quality assurance system, the G-CTAProcsVacBiol notes that the sponsor should perform a clinical trial audit. The purpose of the audit should be to evaluate trial conduct and compliance with the protocol, standard operating procedures (SOPs), and other applicable regulatory requirements. The sponsor should appoint auditors to review the clinical trial. The sponsor should ensure that the auditors are qualified by training and experience, and the auditor’s qualifications should be documented. The sponsor must also ensure that the audit is conducted in accordance with the sponsor’s own SOPs, the auditor observations are documented, and data are available as needed for the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA) to review. No specific timeframe is provided for the audit process.

Per MWI-22, the sponsor should develop a systematic, prioritized, risk-based approach to monitoring clinical trials. The extent and nature of monitoring is flexible and permits varied approaches that improve effectiveness and efficiency. The sponsor may choose on-site monitoring, a combination of on-site and centralized monitoring, or where justified, centralized monitoring. The sponsor should document the rationale for the chosen monitoring strategy (e.g., in the monitoring plan).

Per MWI-61, the PMRA may conduct good clinical practice (GCP) inspections of clinical trial sites before regulatory approval, while the trial is ongoing, when participants are being enrolled in a trial, on a routine basis, when triggered by a complaint, or if there is a suspicion of serious non-compliance integrity issues and/or scientific/ethical misconduct. In general, the inspectee will be notified one (1) to four (4) weeks prior to the proposed announced inspection date and asked to confirm availability. The notification will identify the study and the proposed sites to be inspected. In relation to triggered inspections, the PMRA may provide a shorter notice period. The inspection dates will be confirmed with the inspectee, who may be required to submit information to the PMRA within 14 days of the receipt of the notice of GCP inspection. The inspection plan is finalized by the PMRA before the inspection. See MWI-61 for more information on PMRA GCP inspections.

Premature Study Termination/Suspension

According to MWI-22, if it is discovered that noncompliance significantly affects or has the potential to significantly affect participant protection or reliability of trial results, the sponsor should perform a root cause analysis and implement appropriate corrective and preventive actions. Further, the ethics committee (EC) should also be informed promptly and provided the reason(s) for the termination or suspension by the sponsor. Refer to MWI-17 for the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC)’s protocol termination form.

The G-COMREC states that if a study is prematurely suspended/terminated, the applicant should notify the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC) of the reasons for suspension/termination, and a summary of the results obtained should be communicated to the committee.

6.0

7 (CTA Section 8)

4.0 and 6.2-6.3

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

Last content review/update: October 25, 2024

Quality Assurance/Quality Control

As stated in the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, and GBR-92, 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 and the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113). 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. QC should be applied to each stage of data handling to ensure that all data are reliable and have been correctly processed. The sponsor must also obtain the investigator(s) and the institution(s) agreement to:

Conduct the trial in compliance with GBR-113 and the protocol agreed to by the sponsor and approved by the ethics committee (EC)
Comply with data recording and reporting procedures
Permit monitoring, auditing, and inspection
Retain essential documents until the sponsor informs them that they are no longer needed

MHCTR2006 requires the sponsor to notify the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) of serious breaches of good clinical practice (GCP) or the trial protocol. A serious breach is defined as one that is likely to affect to a significant degree: the safety or physical or mental integrity of the trial participants; or the scientific value of the trial. Per G-MHRA-SeriousBreaches, the sponsor or delegated party should notify the MHRA GCP Inspectorate within seven (7) days of becoming aware of a serious breach. Further, the sponsor should investigate and take action simultaneously after the MHRA notification. Notifications should primarily be sent to the following email address: GCP.SeriousBreaches@mhra.gov.uk.

Per the G-RiskAssmt, MHRA recommends that a risk assessment is undertaken for all clinical trials. Phase 1 trials are required to have a documented risk assessment process and to produce a risk assessment for all proposed trials. The risk assessment should be done as early as possible to help the sponsor identify whether the sponsor wishes to proceed with sponsorship and the potential category of IP for eventual marketing authorization. An early risk assessment will also identify the study management requirements, which can assist in the planning and resourcing aspects of the trial (e.g., identification of trial monitoring requirements so that these can be budgeted for in any funding application). There is no requirement to submit risk assessments to the MHRA or the ethics committee (EC). However, any safety monitoring produced because of the risk assessment must be described in the protocol. Finally, information contained in the risk assessment may prove useful in completing the application form for approvals, particularly for the EC application. See the G-RiskAssmt for details on how to conduct the risk assessment.

See GBR-10 for best practices in improving clinical trial setup to reduce timelines and increase citizens’ access to research. Also see GBR-34 for investigator training and guidance on implementing people-centered research.

Monitoring Requirements

Per GBR-18, the sponsor must develop an audit plan to assess and assure the reliability and integrity of the clinical trial systems against all relevant written standards. The following activities and checks could include the following:

Interview staff to assess whether they are appropriately trained; understand their role(s); and are working to all relevant standards, the protocol, and SOPs.
Tour the facility to assess if there are adequate resources and if the equipment is fit for its intended use.
Review documents to evaluate whether data reported is verifiable from source data and that written records confirm that the trial was conducted appropriately.

Auditors must be independent of the trial team and appropriately trained for their role. Their findings and observations must be documented in a formal audit report. Any deficiencies identified during an audit must be followed up with appropriate corrective and preventive actions wherever possible.

Per GBR-18, the MHRA may conduct inspections to ensure the clinical trial is being conducted in compliance with good clinical practice (GCP) as prescribed in GBR-92 and GBR-113. The MHRA takes a risk-based approach to inspections depending on the type of trials and risk rating. Once an inspection has been completed, a formal report outlining the findings will be sent to the inspected organization. A response to this report (describing any corrective and preventive actions) must be produced. See GBR-92 for pre-inspection checklists and other resources. Per G-RiskAssmt, GCP Inspectors will review risk assessments. The risk assessment should provide the rationale behind trial management/monitoring and GCP activities applied, or not, to the trial.

Finally, the sponsor’s audits and inspections should be conducted in compliance with GBR-113, which calls for a systematic, prioritized, risk-based approach to monitoring clinical trials. The extent and nature of monitoring is flexible and permits varied approaches that improve effectiveness and efficiency. The sponsor may choose on-site monitoring, a combination of on-site and centralized monitoring, or where justified, centralized monitoring. The sponsor should document the rationale for the chosen monitoring strategy (e.g., in the monitoring plan). The G-Ovrsight provides additional guidance to assist sponsors and those conducting trials on implementing adequate oversight and monitoring processes for clinical trials.

Premature Study Termination/Suspension

The G-CTAuth-GBR states that the MHRA has the authority to suspend or terminate a trial. In addition, the sponsor can contact the MHRA to put a trial on temporary halt or terminate a trial. If a sponsor suspends a trial temporarily, the MHRA must be notified. Sponsors of clinical trials of investigational products (CTIMPs) must use the combined review part of the Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) (GBR-125) to submit this notification as a substantial amendment. Per GBR-122, for studies that were submitted before combined review, these applicants should continue to submit this notification at IRAS via GBR-78. The G-CTAuth-GBR indicates the notification should be made as a substantial amendment using the amendment tool, clearly explaining what has been stopped and the reasons for the suspension. To restart a trial that has been temporarily suspended, you must make the request as a substantial amendment using the notification of amendment form, providing evidence that it is safe to restart the trial.

Per the G-CTAuth-GBR and GBR-18, to terminate a CTIMP, the sponsor must notify (as a substantial amendment) the MHRA and the EC via the combined review part of IRAS (GBR-125). For studies that were submitted before combined review, the submission should be made at GBR-78, using the end-of-trial form (GBR-133). GBR-128 specifies that for CTIMPs, the declaration of end of trial must be sent to the MHRA within 15 days of the global premature end of trial. Before declaring an end of the study, sponsors should review the plans that were approved by the EC for use of tissue and data collected in the course of the study, providing information to participants, and dissemination of results. If changes need to be made to these agreed upon arrangements, the sponsor should consider whether an amendment is required before submitting the end of study notification. GBR-65 also states that if research is terminated early or is temporarily suspended, then all relevant review bodies should be notified within 15 days.

According to GBR-113, 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 sponsor should also inform the EC promptly and provide the reason(s) for the termination or suspension.

5.0, 5.1, 5.2, 5.18, 5.19, 5.21, and 6.10

Ongoing Management & Monitoring, MHRA Inspection, Audit, Temporary Halt, Early Termination, and End of Trial Declaration

Early termination or temporary halt of research

Suspend or Terminate a Trial and End of Trial

Amendment of Regulation 31 of the Principal Regulations and Part 2 (Principles Based on Articles 2 to 5 of the GCP Directive)

Part 3 (15), Part 4 (28), Part 6 (36 and 38), and Schedule 7 (Parts 2 and 3)

Data & Records Management

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Electronic Data Processing System

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). As per MWI-22, 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. 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 system setup, installation, and use. The responsibilities of the sponsor, investigator, and other parties should be clear, and the system users should be provided with training. Refer to MWI-22 for additional information.

Records Management

As set forth in MWI-22, sponsor-specific essential documents should be retained until at least two (2) years after the last approval of a marketing application, until there are no pending or contemplated marketing applications, or at least two (2) years have elapsed since the formal discontinuation of the investigational product’s clinical development. The sponsor should inform the investigator(s) and the institution(s) in writing when trial-related records are no longer needed.

In addition, MWI-22 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.

According to MWI-15, consent forms must be kept for three (3) years after the completion of the investigation, unless otherwise stipulated by the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC).

1.65, 5.5, and 8

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Electronic Data Processing System

To safeguard personal data within electronic health record (EHR) systems, G-EHRAccess provides guidance on updating these systems to ensure access by sponsors and their representatives (e.g., monitors and investigators) is limited to only the records of clinical trial participants and that this access is auditable. See G-EHRAccess for details on system security, remote access, document sharing, consent, and other considerations.

According to GBR-113, when using electronic trial data handling processing systems, the sponsor must ensure and document that the electronic data processing system conforms to the sponsor’s established requirements for completeness, accuracy, reliability, and consistency of intended performance. To validate such systems, the sponsor should use a risk assessment approach that takes into consideration the system’s intended use and potential to affect human participant protection and reliability of trial results. In addition, the sponsor must maintain standard operating procedures (SOPs) that cover system setup, installation, and use. The SOPs should describe system validation and functionality testing, data collection and handling, system maintenance, system security measures, change control, data backup, recovery, contingency planning, and decommissioning. With respect to the use of these computerized systems, the responsibilities of the sponsor, investigator, and other parties should be clear, and the users should receive relevant training.

Records Management

As set forth in GBR-113, sponsor-specific essential documents should be retained until at least two (2) years after the last approval of a marketing application, until there are no pending or contemplated marketing applications, or at least two (2) years have elapsed since the formal discontinuation of the investigational product’s clinical development. The sponsor should inform the investigator(s) and the institution(s) in writing when trial-related records are no longer needed.

However, per the MHCTR2006, the sponsor and the Chief Investigator must ensure that the documents contained in the trial master file are retained for at least five (5) years following the trial’s completion. The documents must be readily available to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) upon request and be complete and legible. The sponsor should ensure that trial participant medical files are also retained for at least five (5) years after the trial’s conclusion.

In addition, GBR-113 states that the sponsor and investigator/institution should maintain a record of the location(s) of their respective essential documents including source documents. The storage system used during the trial and for archiving (irrespective of the type of media used) should allow for document identification, version history, search, and retrieval. The sponsor should ensure that the investigator has control of and continuous access to the data reported to the sponsor. The investigator/institution should have control of all essential documents and records generated by the investigator/institution before, during, and after the trial.

1.65, 5.18, and 8

Part 2 (Principles Based on Articles 2 to 5 of the GCP Directive)

Personal Data Protection

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Responsible Parties

For the purposes of data protection requirements, as stated in the G-DataPrtct-MWI, the data controller means a natural or legal person who, alone or jointly with another natural or legal person, determines the purpose and means of processing personal data. The data processor means a natural or legal person who processes personal data on behalf of a data controller. The Malawi Communications Regulatory Authority (MACRA) regulates the processing of personal data and is responsible for the enforcement of the G-DataPrtct-MWI.

Data Protection

A data controller and data processor must process personal data lawfully, fairly, and in a transparent manner, as described in the G-DataPrtct-MWI. Additionally, a data controller and data processor must collect personal data for a specific and legitimate purpose and must not process the data in a manner that is incompatible with the purpose for which it was collected. They also must not store personal data for a period that is longer than necessary to achieve the purpose for which the data is processed, except where the data is stored for the purpose of archiving for public interest or for research or statistical purposes. The appropriate technical or organizational security measures must be implemented to guarantee the security of personal data, including protection against unauthorized or unlawful processing and accidental loss, destruction, or damage of the data.

See the G-DataPrtct-MWI for more details on the duties of a data controller and data processor.

Consent for Processing Personal Data

The G-DataPrtct-MWI indicates that a data controller must obtain the consent of a data subject before processing the personal data of the data subject. Where a data controller seeks consent from a data subject on several matters in the form of a written declaration, each matter on which consent is sought must be presented in a clearly distinguishable manner. A data subject may, at any time, withdraw consent given to a data controller and the withdrawal of the consent shall, where practicable, be in the same manner the consent was provided. The withdrawal must not affect the legality of the data processing that occurred before the withdrawal of the consent. Where a question arises on whether consent was freely provided, consideration must be taken of whether the performance of a contract between the data controller and the data subject, or the delivery of a good or a service by the data controller to the data subject, is conditional on provision of the consent.

According to the G-DataPrtct-MWI, a data controller must, at the time of collecting personal data from a data subject, provide the following information to the data subject:

The identity and contact details of the data controller or representative of the data controller
The legal basis for processing the personal data
The purpose for processing the personal data
Where possible, the storage period for the personal data
The existence of automated decision-making, including profiling
The rights of the data subject provided in the G-DataPrtct-MWI (described below)
The right to lodge a complaint with the MACRA
Whether the data controller intends to transfer the personal data to a place outside Malawi

As per the G-DataPrtct-MWI, a data subject has the right to obtain confirmation of whether personal data concerning the data subject is being processed by the data controller or data processor. Where the data controller or data processor confirms the processing of the personal data of the data subject, the data controller or data processor must provide the data subject with a copy of the personal data being processed (i) in a commonly used electronic format; (ii) within 30 days of receipt of the request; and (iii) where practicable, at no expense to the data subject. The data subject also has a right to data portability, rectification of personal data, erasure of personal data, restriction of processing personal data, object to the processing of personal data, and not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing. See the G-DataPrtct-MWI for more information on these rights.

Children and Incapacitated Persons

The G-DataPrtct-MWI delineates that where a data subject is a child or any other natural person lacking the legal capacity to exercise the rights of the data subject, a parent or legal representative/guardian of the data subject must exercise the rights of the data subject on behalf of the data subject. A data controller or data processor who intends to process personal data of a data subject who is a child or any other natural person lacking legal capacity to provide consent must obtain the consent from a parent or legal representative/guardian of the data subject. Additionally, the data controller or data processor who obtains such consent must put in place appropriate mechanisms to verify the age of the child or the mental capacity of the other natural person, as well as the identity of the parent or legal representative/guardian providing the consent.

Parts I (2), II (4-5), III (8-17), IV, and V

Last content review/update: January 21, 2025

Responsible Parties

For purposes of data protection requirements, the UK-GDPR, the UK-DPAct, and the G-GDPR delineate that the sponsor acts as the “controller” in relation to research data. This is because the sponsor determines what data is collected for the research study through the protocol, case report form, and/or structured data fields in a database. GBR-7 provides guidance on key data protection requirements to consider in the post-Brexit environment. Among other things, it describes how data can continue to flow to and from the United Kingdom (UK), as well as controller responsibilities.

Data Protection

Per the UK-GDPR, the UK-DPAct, the G-GDPR, and GBR-89, the sponsor (known as the “controller” in data protection legislation) must comply with the following principles of the data protection legislation:

Lawfulness, fairness, and transparency
Purpose limitation
Data minimization
Accuracy
Storage limitation
Integrity and confidentiality (security)
Accountability

The sponsor must show that each data processing activity has a lawful basis under this legislation, in addition to the common law basis. For health and social care research, the lawful basis is determined by the data controller’s organization type:

For universities, National Health Service (NHS) organizations, Research Council institutes, or other public authority, the processing of personal data for research should be a “task in the public interest.”
For commercial companies and charitable research organizations, the processing of personal data for research should be undertaken within “legitimate interests.”

As described in the G-GDPR, with regard to transparency, the sponsor should understand whether personal data is collected indirectly from a third party or directly, as these determine the actions to take to comply with data protection requirements. In most cases, the sponsor will need to provide transparency information about the legal basis and other details of processing personal data. See the table in G-GDPR, which sets out the specific transparency requirements for personal data. In addition, GBR-100 contains a series of templates by the Health Research Authority (HRA) with suggested transparency language. Further, the sponsor should take measures to ensure data is processed securely, giving consideration to security, storage, and pseudonymization/anonymization when possible. For details on complying with security and storage requirements, see GBR-100.

Per the UK-GDPR and the UK-DPAct, the data protection legislation introduces a duty requiring public authorities or bodies to appoint a data protection officer (DPO); a DPO may be required for non-public entities if they carry out certain types of processing activities. The DPO assists the sponsor with monitoring internal compliance, informs and advises on data protection obligations, provides advice regarding Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs), and is a point of contact for participants and the supervisory authority. See G-GDPR for guidance related to DPIAs.

For more information on data protection requirements following the UK’s transition out of the European Union (EU), see GBR-7.

Consent for Processing Personal Data

Per the UK-GDPR, UK-DPAct, and G-GDPR, consent to participate in research is not the same as consent as the legal basis for processing personal data under the data protection legislation. Per the G-GDPR, for the purposes of the UK-GDPR, the legal basis for processing data for health and social care research should not be consent. This means that requirements in the UK-GDPR relating to consent do not apply to health and care research. Per the G-GDPR, even though consent is not the legal basis for processing personal data for research, the common law duty of confidentiality still applies, so consent is still needed for people outside the care team to access and use confidential information for research.

As delineated in the UK-GDPR, the UK-DPAct, the G-GDPR, and GBR-89, participants have the right to be informed about the collection and use of their personal data. This is a key transparency requirement under the data protection legislation. The UK-GDPR specifies what data individuals have the right to be informed about (i.e., privacy information). In addition, as delineated in the UK-GDPR, the UK-DPAct, the G-GDPR, and GBR-89, the participant has certain data rights, which are limited by a range of exemptions. These exemptions must be balanced with what is fair to participants. As indicated in the G-GDPR, exemptions to data subject rights are not automatic, but must be considered on a study-by-study basis. It is important, therefore, to take into account the relevance of data rights to a particular study in the Participant Information Sheet (PIS) when offering or limiting the rights available to research participants. If data rights have been previously offered or limited to participants that are not appropriate under UK-GDPR, then the PIS may need to be revised as a non-substantial amendment.

As indicated in the G-GDPR and GBR-100, the HRA has developed a series of templates with transparency language to help organizations comply with the data protection legislation. The requirements vary depending on the point of collection of personal data (directly or indirectly) and the timing of the study. Also see GBR-129 for guidance from the UK Information Commissioner’s Office.

The UKwide-Rsrch describes the following differences among the UK nations regarding accessing identifiable data without consent, including for potential participants:

England and Wales – If the project involves access to identifiable patient data relating to people living or receiving care and treatment in England and Wales without consent, the sponsor may need to apply to the HRA via the Confidentiality Advisory Group (CAG) (GBR-38). The CAG provides advice to the HRA on the use of confidential patient information for research uses. See GBR-41 for details and resources on the CAG.
Northern Ireland – There is currently no legal basis for those outside of the direct care team to process identifiable data without consent. The Health and Social Care Privacy Advisory Committee can provide advice on any options available in Northern Ireland. The Health and Social Care Honest Broker Service does not provide identifiable data for consented studies or trials but may be able to offer advice on options to access anonymized data to support research
Scotland – If a project is multi-center, a sponsor will need to obtain permissions through the Public Benefit and Privacy Panel for Health and Social Care. For single center studies, applicants should contact the Caldicott Guardian at the research site to discuss the requirements for accessing the data

UK-US Data Bridge

As explained in GBR-22, under the “UK Extension to the EU-US Data Privacy Framework” (GBR-23), businesses in the UK can transfer personal data to certified U.S. organizations without further safeguards as defined in the GBR-23. US organizations that have been certified can opt in to receive data from the UK through the UK-US data bridge. Per GBR-19, before transferring personal data, UK organizations must verify that the receiving US organization is certified pursuant to GBR-23. Sensitive personal data must be appropriately identified as sensitive when transferred under the UK-US data bridge to ensure it receives appropriate protections under the framework. Under the UK extension, sensitive personal information includes genetic data, biometric data for the purpose of uniquely identifying a natural person, and data concerning sexual orientation. See GBR-22, GBR-23, and GBR-19 for additional information about the UK Extension to the Data Privacy Framework.

Principles, Lawful Basis for Processing, Individual Rights, Accountability and Governance

Part 1, Part 2 (Chapter 2), and Schedules 2-4

Will identifiable, confidential patient data be accessed outside the care team without prior consent at any stage of the project (including identification of potential participants)?

Documentation Requirements

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Obtaining Consent

In all Malawian clinical trials, a freely given informed consent is required to be obtained from each participant in accordance with the requirements set forth in the G-NHSRC and G-COMREC-IC. The G-BioSampCompense also confirms that a participant’s voluntary informed consent is required. Also, per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22).

As per the G-NHSRC, the G-CTAProcsVacBiol, the G-CTARevVacBiol, the G-COMREC, and MWI-22, the informed consent form (ICF) is viewed as an essential document that must be reviewed and approved by one (1) of the two (2) National Commission for Science and Technology (NCST)-approved ethics committees (ECs)—the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) and the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC)—and provided to the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA) with the clinical trial application. (See the Required Elements section for details on the contents to be included in the form.)

The G-NHSRC, the G-COMREC-IC, and MWI-22 state that the participant or legal representative/guardian must be provided with detailed research study information. Per the G-NHSRC, the ICF content should be presented orally and in writing, in a manner that is easy to understand, commensurate with the comprehension level of the research participants, and without coercion. When drafting and presenting the ICF, special consideration must be taken with regard to the participant’s culture, traditional values, intelligence, and education.

As per the G-NHSRC and MWI-22, none of the oral and written information concerning the research study, including the written ICF, should contain any language that causes the participant or the legal representative/guardian to waive or appear to waive the participant’s legal rights, or that releases or appears to release the investigator(s), the institution, the sponsor, or their representatives from their liabilities for any negligence. The G-BioSampCompense also confirms that researchers must not duly induce participants to participate in any proposed research. Rather, they must design and implement their studies in a manner that calls for the participants’ informed voluntary consent to participate.

Re-Consent

According to MWI-22, the written ICF and any other written information to be provided to participants should be revised whenever important new information becomes available that may be relevant to the participant’s consent. Any revised written ICF and written information should receive the EC's approval/favorable opinion in advance of use. The participant or legal representative/guardian should be informed in a timely manner if new information becomes available that may be relevant to the participant’s willingness to continue participation in the trial. The communication of this information should be documented, and the participant or legal representative/guardian should receive a copy of the signed and dated ICF updates, including a copy of any amendments to the written information provided to the participants.

Language Requirements

As stated in the G-NHSRC, the G-COMREC, and the G-COMREC-IC, the ICF should be written in English and any other relevant local languages that the participant is able to understand.

Documenting Consent

The G-NHSRC and MWI-22 specify that the participant or legal representative/guardian must sign the ICF. The G-NHSRC indicates that where the participant is illiterate, the NHSRC will permit the participant to provide a thumbprint in the presence of a witness, who must also sign the ICF. NHSRC also permits the participant to provide verbal consent in cases where the participant is illiterate. However, the script or information sheet to be read to the potential participant must be approved by NHSRC and signed for by the participant’s legal representative/guardian.

MWI-22 states that where the participant is illiterate or 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 provided to the participant is read and explained to the participant and the legal representative/guardian
The participant and the legal representative/guardian, have orally consented to the participant’s involvement in the trial, and has signed and dated the ICF, if capable of doing so

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

According to MWI-15, consent forms must be kept for three (3) years after the completion of the investigation, unless otherwise stipulated by the NHSRC.

Waiver of Consent

Per the G-NHSRC, the NHSRC may waive the requirement for the investigator to obtain a signed ICF in cases where circumstances warrant such a waiver. The following conditions may be considered for a waiver:

The research presents no more than a minimal risk of harm to the participants and involves no procedures for which written consent is normally required outside of the research context
The research could not practically be carried out without the consent waiver and obtaining informed consent is not practicable
The consent document is the only link between the participant and the research and the principal risk of harm would come from a breach of confidentiality
Waiver is consistent with the individual’s rights

The G-NHSRC indicates that in lieu of a signed ICF, the NHSRC may require the investigator to provide participants with a written statement regarding the research in the form of an information or fact sheet. This statement should contain, at a minimum:

A statement verifying that the project involves research
A description of the level of involvement and amount of time expected from participants
A description of the study
A description of the risks and benefits to the participants
A statement describing the participant’s rights
A description of the compensation to be provided to participants
Contact information for both the investigator and NHSRC chairperson

(b)(i)

5.0

7 (Checklist of Required Documents (Appendix 4), CTA Section 10, and Check of Appended Documents (Appendix 4))

Screening Form

5.1, 6.2, 7.0, and 7.4

2, 4.4, 4.8, 8.2, and 8.3

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

New Info (Not Yet in Profile)

On April 10, 2025, the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) (Amendment) Regulations 2024 was signed into law. There is a 12-month implementation period before the amended regulations come fully into force on April 10, 2026. For more information, see the Health Research Authority news update.

Obtaining Consent

In all United Kingdom (UK) clinical trials, a freely given informed consent must be obtained from each participant in accordance with the requirements set forth in the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113). As per the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, and GBR-9, the informed consent form (ICF) is viewed as an essential document that must be reviewed and approved by an ethics committee (EC) recognized by the United Kingdom Ethics Committee Authority (UKECA) (henceforth referred to as a “recognized EC”) and operating according to standard operating procedures (GBR-9) issued by England’s Health Research Authority (HRA).) Refer to GBR-18 and GBR-69 for more on informed consent in the UK.

The MHCTR and G-ConsentPIS, state that the investigator(s) must provide detailed research study information to the participant or legal representative/guardian. The MHCTR and G-ConsentPIS also specify that the oral and written information concerning the trial, including the ICF, should be easy to understand and presented without coercion or unduly influencing a potential participant to enroll in the clinical trial. The participant and the legal representative/guardian, should also be given adequate time to consider whether to participate. Per G-ConsentPIS, the Participant Information Sheet (PIS) supports the consent process to help ensure participants have been adequately informed. In addition, the PIS forms part of the transparency information that must be provided to participants under the data protection legislation for the use and processing of personal data. (See the Personal Data Protection section for more information on data protection requirements.) For more guidance on the PIS, see the PrtInfoQty-Stds, the PrtInfo-DesignPrin, and GBR-14, which include FAQs, information principles, and standards.

Per GBR-31, the HRA guides researchers and ECs in taking a proportionate approach to seeking consent. A proportionate approach adopts procedures commensurate with the balance of risk and benefits so that potential participants are not overwhelmed by unnecessarily lengthy, complex, and inaccessible information sheets. Participants should be provided with succinct, relevant, truthful information in a user-friendly manner that promotes their autonomy. Specifically, the methods and procedures used to seek informed consent and the level of information provided should be proportionate to:

The nature and the complexity of the research
The risks, burdens, and potential benefits (to the participants and/or society)
The ethical issues at stake

Per GBR-113, none of the oral and written information concerning the clinical trial, including the written ICF, should contain any language that causes the participant or legal representative/guardian to waive or to appear to waive any legal rights, or that releases or appears to release the investigator, the institution, the sponsor, or their agents from liability for negligence.

Re-Consent

According to GBR-113, the EC should approve any change in the ICF due to a protocol modification 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.

Per GBR-18, during a clinical trial, researchers should periodically reaffirm the willingness of participants to continue. If significant new information becomes available, participants should be reconsented using revised (and re-approved) consent documents so that their continued consent is confirmed.

Language Requirements

As stated in the MHCTR, applications to the EC and the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and any accompanying material, such as the ICF content, should be presented in English.

Documenting Consent

The MHCTR states that the participant or legal representative/guardian, and the investigator(s) must sign and date the ICF. Where the participant is illiterate, or the legal representative/guardian is illiterate, verbal consent should be obtained in the presence of and countersigned by an impartial witness. As provided in G-ConsentPIS, consent can be documented electronically or in writing. A physical or electronic copy of the signed consent form will still need to be provided to the participant. To record consent electronically, electronic signatures will be needed. Because there are different forms and classifications of electronic signatures, the researcher should determine what is appropriate for the particular study. GBR-6 sets out the legal and ethical requirements for seeking and documenting consent using electronic methods (also known as eConsent in the UK), as well as expectations regarding the use of electronic signatures. eConsent enables potential research participants to be provided with the information they need to make a decision via a tablet, smartphone, or digital multimedia. It also enables their informed consent to be documented using electronic signatures. This approach can supplement the traditional paper-based approach or, where appropriate, replace it.

Waiver of Consent

No information is currently available.

1 and 2

2, 4.4, 4.8, 8.2, and 8.3

Informed Consent

Principles of consent - General principals and Role of Participant Information Sheets; Content - Participant Information Sheet and Consent Form; and Examples and Templates

Amendment of Regulation 3 of the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Regulation 12 of the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Regulation 15 of the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Schedule 1 to the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Schedule 3 to the Principal Regulations; and Part 2 (Principles Based on Articles 2 to 5 of the GCP Directive and Conditions Based on Article 3 of the Directive)

Part 1 (3), Part 3 (12, 15, 17, and 18), Schedule 1 (Part 1 (3) and Part 2), and Schedule 3 (Parts 1 and 3)

Required Elements

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 provides guidance on the elements to include in the informed consent form (ICF). The G-NHSRC and MWI-22 state that information about the research study should be clearly presented in both written and oral form.

Based on the G-NHSRC, the G-COMREC-IC, the G-NHSRC-ICF, MWI-22, and MWI-13, the 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 title, purpose, procedures, and duration
Experimental aspects of the study
The responsibilities and expected duration of the participant's participation
The trial treatment(s) and the probability for random assignment to each treatment
Any expected risks or discomforts to the participant, and when applicable, to an embryo, fetus, or nursing infant
Any expected benefits to the participant, others, or to the country as a whole that may reasonably be expected from the research
Description of procedures, including data collection, that will be followed
Identification of any experimental procedures
Disclosure of alternate procedures or treatments available to participants that might be advantageous to the participant
Compensation and/or treatment available for the participant in the case of trial-related injury
The anticipated prorated payment, if any, to the participant for participating in the trial
The anticipated expenses, if any, to the participant for participating in the trial
That participation is voluntary, and that the participant can refuse to participate or withdraw from the study at any time without penalty or loss of benefits, including medical treatment, to which the participant is otherwise entitled
That the monitor(s), the auditor(s), the ethics committee (EC), and the regulatory authority(ies) will be granted direct access to the participant's original medical records for verification of clinical trial procedures and/or data, without violating the confidentiality of the participant, to the extent permitted by the applicable laws and regulations and that, by signing a written ICF, the participant or the participant's legally acceptable representative is authorizing such access
The extent to which confidentiality of records identifying the participant will be maintained
Name and contact details of institutions that have approved the study
Contact information for the sponsor and investigator in the event of participant problems or trial-related injuries
EC contact information
Foreseeable circumstances under which the investigator(s) may remove the participant without the participant’s consent
The consequences of a participant’s decision to withdraw from the research, and procedures for orderly withdrawal by the participant
That the participant or legal representative/guardian will be notified in a timely manner if significant new findings develop during the course of the study which may affect the participant's willingness to continue
Any additional costs to the participant that may result from participation in the research
The site of the study
Consent and signature or thumb print, including the last sentence, which should explicitly read “I voluntarily agree”

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

5.1, 6.2, 7.0, and 7.1

4.4 and 4.8

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Based on the MHCTR, the G-ConsentPIS, and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), 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 purpose, procedures, and duration
Study title and the study Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) ID are clearly displayed
Approximate number of participants involved in the trial
The participant’s responsibilities in participating in the trial
Trial treatment schedule and the probability for random assignment to each treatment
Experimental aspects of the study
Any foreseeable risks or discomforts to the participant, and when applicable, to an embryo, fetus, or nursing infant
Any benefits or prorated payment to the participant or to others that may reasonably be expected from 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
Compensation and/or medical treatment available to the participant in the event of a trial-related injury
Any additional costs to the participant that may result from participation in the research
That participation is voluntary, the participant may withdraw at any time, and refusal to participate will not involve any penalty or loss of benefits, or reduction in the level of care to which the participant is otherwise entitled
The extent to which confidentiality of records identifying the participant will be maintained, and the possibility of record access by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the ethics committees (ECs), the auditor(s), and the monitor(s)
That the participant or legal representative/guardian will be notified if significant new findings developed during the study may affect the participant's willingness to continue
Individuals to contact for further information regarding the trial, the rights of trial participants, and whom to contact in the event of trial-related injury
Foreseeable circumstances under which the investigator(s) may remove the participant without consent

ICF examples and templates are provided in the G-ConsentPIS.

For more information about informed consent required elements, see GBR-18, GBR-113, GBR-100, GBR-31, and GBR-69.

1 and 2

4.4 and 4.8

Informed Consent

Principles of consent - General principles and Role of Participant Information Sheets; Content - Participant Information Sheet and Consent Form

Part 1 (3), Part 3 (12 and 15), and Schedule 3 (Parts 1 and 3)

Participant Rights

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Overview

Per the G-NHSRC, Malawi’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 MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22), which addresses participant rights.

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

The Right to Participate, Abstain, or Withdraw

As set forth in the G-NHSRC, the G-COMREC-IC, and MWI-22, the participant or legal representative/guardian should be informed that participation is voluntary, that the participant may withdraw from the research study at any time, and that refusal to participate will not involve any penalty or loss of benefits to which the participant is otherwise entitled.

The Right to Information

As delineated in the G-NHSRC, the G-COMREC-IC, and MWI-22, 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. (See the Required Elements section for more detailed information regarding participant rights.)

The Right to Privacy and Confidentiality

As per the G-NHSRC, the G-COMREC-IC, and MWI-22, all participants must be afforded the right to privacy and confidentiality, and the ICF must provide a statement that recognizes this right. It is the responsibility of the investigator(s) to safeguard the confidentiality of research data to protect the identity and records of research participants.

The Right of Inquiry/Appeal

The G-NHSRC, the G-COMREC-IC, and MWI-22 state that the research participant or legal representative/guardian should be provided with contact information for the sponsor and the investigator(s) to address trial-related inquiries and/or to appeal against a violation of the participant’s rights. (See the Required Elements section for more detailed information regarding participant rights.)

The Right to Safety and Welfare

The Malawi government complies with MWI-22 principles that state 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.

2, 6.2, and 7.1

2, 3.1, and 4.8

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Overview

In accordance with the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, the G-ConsentPIS, and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), the United Kingdom’s (UK’s) ethical standards promote respect for all human beings and safeguard the rights of research participants. The MHCTR states that a participant’s rights must also be clearly addressed in the informed consent form (ICF) and during the informed consent process.

The Right to Participate, Abstain, or Withdraw

As set forth in the MHCTR, the G-ConsentPIS, and GBR-113, the participant or legal representative/guardian should be informed that participation is voluntary, that they may withdraw from the research study at any time, and that refusal to participate will not involve any penalty or loss of benefits to which the participant is otherwise entitled.

The Right to Information

As delineated in the MHCTR, the G-ConsentPIS, and GBR-113, 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.

Also see GBR-117 for an interactive web-based communications toolkit to help researchers and participants keep in touch after participation in a research study.

The Right to Privacy and Confidentiality

As per the MHCTR and GBR-113, the arrangements to protect participants’ privacy should be provided in the application to the ethics committee, and the ICF should inform potential participants of any potential risk to their confidentiality.

The Right of Inquiry/Appeal

The MHCTR and GBR-113 state that the research participant or legal representative/guardian should be provided with contact information for the sponsor and the investigator(s) to address trial-related inquiries.

The Right to Safety and Welfare

The MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, and GBR-113 state that a research participant’s rights, safety, and well-being must take precedence over the interests of science and society.

4.8

Principles and Content

Amendment of Regulation 3 of the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Schedule 1 to the Principal Regulations; and Part 2 (Principles Based on Articles 2 to 5 of the GCP Directive and Conditions Based on Article 3 of the Directive)

Part 1 (3 and 15), Schedule 1 (Parts 1, 2, and 5)

Emergencies

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 makes provisions to protect the rights of a research participant during the informed consent process when the procedure is complicated by medical emergencies.

Per MWI-22, in an emergency, if the signed informed consent form (ICF) has not been obtained from the research participant or legal representative/guardian, or if an effective treatment is lacking but the investigational product could address the participant’s emergency needs, the clinical trial may be conducted. However, the method used on the participant must be explained clearly in the trial protocol, and the ethics committee (EC) 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.

As per the G-NHSRC, a waiver of consent may be justified if the research being conducted could not practically be carried out without the consent waiver, and obtaining informed consent is not practicable. See the Documentation Requirements section for more information on waiver of consent.

7.4

4.8

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

The MHCTR, the MHCTR2006-No2, the MHCTR-BSQ, and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113) make provisions to protect the rights of a research participant during the informed consent process when a clinical trial of an investigational product (IP) is complicated by medical emergencies. As delineated in the G-ConsentPIS and GBR-18, 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 the ethics committee (EC) must provide documented approval in order to protect the participant’s rights, safety, and well-being. The participant or legal representative/guardian should provide consent as soon as possible.

The MHCTR-BSQ amends the MHCTR and creates an exception for minors participating in a trial where urgent treatment is required and prior consent cannot be obtained. This situation also requires the EC to issue its approval beforehand.

The MHCTR2006-No2 amends the MHCTR and creates an exception to the general rule in England, Northern Ireland, and Wales that incapacitated adults cannot be included in a clinical trial under medical emergencies. If the treatment to be provided is a matter of urgency and obtaining prior consent is not possible, incapacitated adult participants may be included in the trial once EC approval has been obtained. In Scotland, the provisions of Section 51 of the AIA2000 govern the inclusion of adults lacking capacity in research.

The G-ConsentPIS states that the United Kingdom allows adults not able to consent for themselves to be recruited into clinical trials without prior consent in emergency situations if the following conditions exist:

Treatment needs to be given urgently
It is also necessary to take urgent action to administer the drug (IP) for the purposes of the trial
It is not reasonably practicable to obtain consent from a legal representative
The procedure is approved by an EC
Consent is sought from a legal representative as soon as possible

4.8.15

Informed Consent

Principles of Consent - Emergency Research

Section 51

4 and Explanatory Note

2 and Explanatory Note

Schedule 1 (Parts 4 and 5)

Vulnerable Populations

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Overview

As per the G-NHSRC, in all Malawian clinical trials, research participants selected from vulnerable populations must be provided additional protections to safeguard their health and welfare during the informed consent process. The G-NHSRC characterizes vulnerable populations as those who are relatively or absolutely incapable of protecting their own interests due to illiteracy, a lack of education, autonomy, resources, or other necessary attributes. These participants may include children, pregnant women, prisoners, refugees, orphans, sex workers, people living with HIV and AIDS, persons with mental disabilities, and persons in dependent relationships (e.g., some women who culturally must ask their husbands before consenting to participate in a research study).

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 includes the following as vulnerable populations: 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 populations include persons in nursing homes, patients in emergency situations, ethnic minority groups, homeless persons, nomads, refugees, minors, and those incapable of giving consent.

The G-NHSRC specifies that National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) members must pay special attention to protecting participants who are from vulnerable populations. Consent for those who are not legally, mentally, and physically able should be sought from their legal representative/guardian in the form of a signature or thumbprint.

As per the G-NHSRC, trials involving vulnerable persons require the research to be directly related to the specific conditions of the vulnerable population involved, and that the participants should personally benefit from the research. In addition, the following elements must be considered when studies are conducted using vulnerable populations:

The methods of recruitment, selection, and inclusion/exclusion criteria, as well as informed consent, data confidentiality, and the participant’s willingness to volunteer
Group characteristics such as economic, social, physical, environmental, and cultural conditions
Applicable local laws that bear on the decision-making abilities of potentially vulnerable participants
Research studies involving potentially vulnerable population groups should have adequate procedures in place for assessing and ensuring participants’ capacity, understanding, and informed consent or assent
Safeguards may include NHSRC monitoring of the consent process where possible

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

5.2, 7.0, and 9.2

1.61 and 4.8

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Overview

As per the MHCTR and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), in all United Kingdom (UK) clinical trials, research participants selected from vulnerable populations must be provided additional protections to safeguard their health and welfare during the informed consent process.

Per GBR-131, vulnerability may be defined in different ways and may arise as a result of being in an abusive relationship, vulnerability due to age, potential marginalization, disability, and due to disadvantageous power relationships within personal and professional roles. Participants may not be conventionally vulnerable but may be in a dependent relationship that means they can feel coerced or pressured into taking part.

As stated in GBR-131, researchers must assess potential vulnerability within the context of the research, in terms of potential consequences from their participation (immediate and long-term) or lack of positive impact where this is immediately needed or expected. Further, researchers should make the participants aware of the limits to confidentiality and decide whether verbal or written consent will be more appropriate and protective of the participants’ interests. In addition, researchers should consider the following:

Participants’ vulnerability
Potential negative consequences or lack of personal benefits from their involvement in research where these are expected
Providing appropriate information to elicit freely-given informed consent for participation as well as information regarding data deposit and data re-use (where deposit is possible)
Limits to confidentiality and occasions where this may occur
Legal requirements of working with the specific population
Incentives and compensation for participation

In addition, GBR-131 states that when working with participants who are considered vulnerable, researchers may find themselves in a position of increased responsibilities or expectations. Researchers should endeavor to assess the likelihood of additional ethics issues and develop strategies and a framework of clear responsibilities they can refer to should such issues arise. They should also use their research ethics committee as a resource for advice and guidance. Researchers should be able to justify the approach they take in dealing with unforeseen ethics issues and maintain the integrity of the research.

As per GBR-131, in cases where research involves potentially vulnerable groups, every effort should be made to secure freely given informed consent that participants have actively provided. Every effort should be made to ensure that they have the time and opportunity to access support in their decision-making, for example by discussing their choice with a trusted adult or relative. Passive assent, including group assent (with consent given by a gatekeeper) should be avoided wherever possible, and every effort should be made to develop methods of seeking consent that are appropriate to the groups studied, using expert advice, support, and training, where necessary. Vulnerability should be considered on a case-by-case basis; many groups or individuals not traditionally considered as vulnerable could be exposed to issues from participating in research that make them vulnerable. See GBR-131 for additional resources and case studies.

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

1.61, 3.1, and 4.8

Schedule 1 (Parts 1, 4, and 5)

Children/Minors

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

The G-NHSRC states that a minor is a person less than 18 years of age. When the research participant is a minor, assent must be obtained in tandem with permission from the parent/legal guardian.

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 states that when a clinical trial includes minors, the minors should be informed about the trial to the extent compatible with their understanding and, if capable, they should sign and personally date the written informed consent.

Assent Requirements

As per the G-NHSRC, assent must be obtained from a minor who is deemed capable of providing assent. The National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) bases its assessment of a minor’s ability to assent on the minor’s age, maturity, and psychological state. In certain cases, the NHSRC may regard assent by minors to represent informed consent without requiring the permission of a parent/legal guardian. A typical case is when the minors are emancipated, and may include those that are legally married or are university students under the age of 18.

7.0 and 9.2

4.8

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

According to the MHCTR and GBR-4, a minor in the United Kingdom (UK) is an individual under 16 years of age.

As set forth in the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, the G-ConsentPIS, GBR-4, GBR-9, and the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), when the research participant is a minor, informed consent should be obtained from a parent/legal guardian. As per GBR-4, the researcher needs only to obtain consent from one (1) person with parental responsibility. GBR-130 further indicates that the parent/legal guardian must not be connected with the conduct of the trial, is suitable to act by virtue of their relationship with the child/young person, and is available and willing to do so. A legal representative should only ever be approached if someone with parental responsibility cannot be contacted prior to the proposed inclusion of the child/young person due to the urgent nature of the treatment provided as part of the trial. In this situation, a professional legal representative (e.g., a doctor) can be responsible for the medical treatment of the child/young person if they are independent of the study, or a person nominated by the healthcare provider.

Additionally, GBR-130 states that researchers must ensure that the parent/legal guardian:

Understand that they are being asked to give consent on behalf of the child/young person
Understand the objectives, risks, and inconveniences of the trial and the conditions under which it is to be conducted
Have been informed of the right to withdraw the child/young person from the trial at any time
Have a contact point where further information about the trial can be obtained

The MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, and GBR-4, state that a study may only be conducted on minors if several conditions are fulfilled including:

An ethics committee (EC), following consultation with pediatric experts, has endorsed the protocol
The parent/guardian has had an interview with the investigator(s) to understand the trial objectives and risks, been provided with a point of contact for further information, and been informed of the right to withdraw the minor from the trial at any time
No incentives or financial inducements are given to the minor or the parent/guardian except in the event of trial-related injury or loss
The trial relates directly to a condition from which the minor suffers, or is of such a nature that it can only be carried out on minors
The participant(s) will derive some direct benefit from their participation in the trial
The trial is necessary to validate data obtained in other trials involving persons able to give informed consent, or by other research methods
The trial has been designed to minimize pain, discomfort, fear, and any other foreseeable risk in relation to the disease and the minor’s stage of development

GBR-4 provides additional best practices:

Children and their parents (or those with parental responsibility) should be involved in the decision-making process around consent to take part in research, regardless of whether the child or young person is legally competent to give consent. This includes involving children or young people who are not considered competent to give consent.
Assent should be sought from a child who is not considered competent as long as this is practicable and the child is not too young.
In some situations, a young person who is competent may object to the involvement of their parents and their confidentiality should be respected.
Before giving consent, children and young people should be provided with age-appropriate information that enables them to understand participation in research. Information may be provided using a layered or staged approach so that it is more easily understood.
Children and young people should be given the opportunity to ask questions and to get support in their decision-making, such as talking to a trusted adult.
Good records should be kept of any discussions about consent and of the final decision.
Inducements and coercion must be avoided.
Seeking consent is a process and it is good practice to engage regularly with the child and family over the course of research to confirm they are willing to continue. In studies in which children who are not competent will become competent during the study period, then consent from young people should be sought as soon as possible after competency is reached. A decision about how this will be managed should be made at the start of the study and included in the protocol.

See the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, GBR-4, and GBR-9 for detailed requirements. The G-ConsentPIS provides style guidance and suggestions for presenting age-appropriate information in the participant information sheet.

Assent Requirements

As indicated in GBR-4, whenever practical and appropriate, a child's assent should be sought before including them in research. Even when a child or young person is competent, it is still normally good practice to involve the family in the decision-making process; however, if the young person objects, researchers should respect their privacy.

As per GBR-4, for clinical trials of investigational products (IPs), it is usually inappropriate to ask very young children (e.g., under five (5) years old) to sign an assent form; however, their views should be considered. Researchers must make an informed judgment to determine when seeking assent is appropriate; the age of a child can only be taken as a guide. The child's developmental stage, knowledge of illness and experience of health care should also be considered. Although there is a danger that children can be asked to exercise greater autonomy than normal, this must be balanced with the potential loss of trust associated with denying their assent. Such judgment needs a framework of considerations for analysis, a record of observations, and discussions and a documented decision. In circumstances where seeking assent at the outset is not appropriate, the researcher could provide the child with information as and when required.

Guidance (Consent)

2.51-2.58

4.8.12

Clinical Trial of an Investigational Medicinal Product (Consent for under 16)

Style and Examples & Templates

Amendment of Schedule 1 to the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Regulation 15 of the Principal Regulations; and Part 2 (Conditions Based on Article 3 of the Directive)

Part 1 (2) and Schedule 1 (Part 4)

Pregnant Women, Fetuses & Neonates

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 states that 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.

4.8

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

The G-ConsentPIS states that researchers must give a clear warning to potential participants when there is a risk of harm to an unborn child and/or risk when breastfeeding. The Participant Information Sheet (PIS) should provide specific advice to potential participants about the risks of becoming pregnant, of fathering a child, or of breastfeeding while taking part in the research including the need for pregnancy testing, contraceptive requirements, and how to report a pregnancy during the study. The PIS should also provide information about what will happen if a participant becomes pregnant, including whether and how the researcher will monitor the pregnancy. This would include access to the mother's and/or child's notes, and any possible follow up of the child including post-natal examinations. For men, researchers must provide clear warnings and advice if the research treatment could damage sperm and consequently pose a risk to possible pregnancies. Specific advice for pregnant partners may be needed, including information on any compensation arrangements.

Further, the G-ConsentPIS finds that the risk of harm caused during pregnancy is most likely when recruiting young people to a clinical trial for an investigational medicinal product (CTIMP). In this case, there should be consent from someone over the age of 16, and the following should be done:

Discuss the risk of pregnancy, pregnancy testing, and the use of appropriate contraception with their parents (or their legal guardian) during the consent process and with young potential participants as part of the assent process
Consider local social beliefs
Involve pediatricians and the ethics committee in preliminary discussions if this is a concern
Consult young people when designing consent and writing information
Respect the young person's autonomy but encourage involvement of the parents
Be aware that in CTIMPs, it is the parents of children under 16 who legally provide consent, and this will include consent to pregnancy testing and discussion of contraception
Information needs to go beyond "We will do a pregnancy test…" to include what will happen in broad terms

In accordance with the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), 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 set forth in GBR-35, any research studies involving women capable of becoming pregnant and breastfeeding women require additional safeguards to ensure the research conforms to appropriate ethical standards and upholds societal values. According to GBR-35, the following conditions are required for research to be conducted with this population:

Reproductive toxicology studies have been completed and the results support conducting a trial, or there is a good reason not to conduct the reproductive toxicology studies and/or the risk of pregnancy is minimized (e.g., because she agrees to adhere to a highly effective method of contraception); Women using a hormonal contraceptive, such as “the pill,” should use an alternative method of contraception until the possibility of an interaction with the investigational product has been excluded
The female participant is not pregnant according to her menstrual history and a pregnancy test, and is not at risk of becoming pregnant during, and for a specified interval, after the trial
The female participant is warned about the potential risks to the developing child should she become pregnant, and she is tested for pregnancy during the trial, as appropriate
The female is tested for pregnancy before dosing starts and possibly during the trial, as appropriate

Content - Participant Information Sheet

Prisoners

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

No information available regarding consent requirements for prisoners.

Last content review/update: January 21, 2025

Per the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), prisoners are considered vulnerable because incarceration could affect their ability to make a voluntary decision regarding participation in research. A research study involving prisoners should ensure that these prospective participants are informed and are given the opportunity to make their own decisions without any interference from a higher authority. 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.

Per the UKwide-Rsrch, a prisoner or young offender is defined as any inmate of the prison systems of England and Wales, Scotland, or Northern Ireland. It does not include patients detained under the MHAct at special hospitals or other psychiatric secure units, or juvenile offenders detained in local authority secure accommodation or secure training centers. Health research involving prisoners or young offenders should relate directly to their health care and be of such a nature that it could only be conducted in this population. See the UKwide-Rsrch for details on differences between the four (4) United Kingdom nations with regard to research on prisoners.

1.61

Do you plan to include any participants who are prisoners, young offenders or on probation?

Mentally Impaired

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 states that when a clinical trial includes participants with mental impairment (e.g., those with severe dementia), the participants should be informed about the trial to the extent compatible with their understanding and, if capable, they should sign and personally date the written informed consent.

The G-NHSRC states that consent for those who are not mentally able should be sought from their legal representative/guardian in the form of a signature or thumbprint.

7.0

1.61, 3.1, and 4.8

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

As per the MHCTR and GBR-9, a recognized ethics committee (EC) within the Health Research Authority (HRA), must approve the participation of adult research participants who are incapable by reason of physical and mental capacity to give consent, and must obtain advice from professionals with expertise in handling this population.

The MHCTR and the G-ConsentPIS, specify that when a study involves adult participants with mental incapacities, informed consent should be obtained from the legal representative/guardian. This consent should only be provided once the legal representative/guardian has had an interview with the investigator(s) to understand the trial objectives and risks, been provided with a point of contact for further information, and been informed of the right to withdraw the participant from the trial at any time. The G-ConsentPIS provides additional country-specific information on legal representative requirements.

As delineated in the MHCTR, a clinical trial of an investigational product may involve participants with mental incapacities under the following conditions:

The participant has received information according to the participant’s capacity of understanding regarding the trial, its risks, and its benefits
No incentives or financial inducements are given to the participant or legal representative/guardian except in the event of trial-related injury or loss
The trial relates directly to a condition from which the participant suffers, or is of such a nature that it can only be carried out on participants with mental incapacities
The participant(s) will derive some direct benefit from their participation in the trial, or produce no risk at all
The trial is necessary to validate data obtained in other trials involving persons able to give informed consent, or by other research methods
The trial has been designed to minimize pain, discomfort, fear, and any other foreseeable risk in relation to the disease and the participant’s stage of development

See the MHCTR, G-ConsentPIS, and GBR-3 for detailed requirements.

2.51-2.58

Principles of Consent - Adults Who Are Not Able to Consent for Themselves

Part 1 (15), Schedule 1 (Parts 1 and 5)

Definition of Investigational Product

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

As delineated in the D-ImprtRelIMPs and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22), an investigational product (IP) (also referred to as an investigational medicinal product (IMP) in Malawi) is defined as a pharmaceutical form of an active substance or placebo being tested or used as a reference in a clinical trial. This includes a product with a marketing authorization when it is used or assembled (formulated or packaged) in a different way from the approved form, when used for an unauthorized indication, or when used to gain further information about an approved use. Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow MWI-22.

7

1.33

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

New Info (Not Yet in Profile)

On April 10, 2025, the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) (Amendment) Regulations 2024 was signed into law. There is a 12-month implementation period before the amended regulations come fully into force on April 10, 2026. For more information, see the Health Research Authority news update.

As delineated in the MHCTR, the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), and GBR-9, an investigational product (IP), referred to as an investigational medicinal product (IMP) in the United Kingdom (UK), is defined as a pharmaceutical form of an active substance or placebo being tested or used as a reference in a clinical trial. This includes a product with a marketing authorization when it is used or assembled (formulated or packaged) in a different way from the approved form; when used for an unapproved indication; or when used to gain further information about an approved use.

Terminology (Statutory Definitions Relating to CTIMPs)

1.3

Part 1 (2)

Manufacturing & Import

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Manufacturing

According to the PMRAAct, the D-ImprtRelIMPs, and the G-CTARevVacBiol, the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA) is responsible for authorizing the manufacture of investigational products (IPs) (also referred to as an investigational medicinal products (IMPs)) in Malawi.

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 requires IPs to be manufactured, handled, and stored in accordance with applicable good manufacturing practice (GMP) and used in accordance with the approved protocol. See MWI-11 for the PMRA’s GMP inspection application form.

Import

As stated in the PMRAAct, the D-ImprtRelIMPs, and the G-ImpExpMP, the PMRA is also responsible for authorizing the import of IPs. Per the PMRAAct and the G-ImpExpMP, the PMRA’s authorization is issued as an import permit. The G-ImpExpMP designates the principal investigator of a registered clinical trial as an authorized importer. IP import permit applications should be made by the pharmacist of record for the trial.

As per the G-CTAProcsVacBiol and the G-CTARevVacBiol, the applicant may apply for an import permit at the same time that the clinical trial application is submitted to the PMRA. (Per MWI-34, the guidance in the G-CTAProcsVacBiol and the G-CTARevVacBiol also apply to clinical trials of drugs.)

The G-ImpExpMP further states that upon receipt of an import application, the PMRA will conduct an assessment to verify whether the requirements, as described in the G-ImpExpMP, have been fulfilled. If the application meets the prescribed requirements, the applicant will be required to pay applicable import permit fees (See the Regulatory Fees section) and the PMRA will issue an import permit. In the case that an application has been rejected, the applicant will be issued a rejection letter (see Annex 2 of the G-ImpExpMP) stating clearly reason(s) for rejection. The regulatory processing time for an import permit application is 10 working days. The import permit will be valid for six (6) months, not transferable to any other person, and may be extended for a period not exceeding three (3) months upon successful application to the PMRA. For additional information on general import application requirements, see the G-ImpExpMP.

Per the D-ImprtRelIMPs, shipping of IPs should be conducted according to instructions given by or on behalf of the sponsor in the shipping order. A pre-clearance inspection should be carried out at the port of entry by the PMRA. The sponsor must complete the cover sheet contained in Annex 1 of the D-ImprtRelIMPs for the importation and release of IPs. Please note: Malawi is party to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing (MWI-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 MWI-35.

1, 3, 5, and Annex 1

3, 5, and 7 (Checklist of Required Documents (Fees), and Check of Appended Documents (Fees))

2.1 and 3.2

Part II (Section 4), Part V (Section 58), and Part X (Section 96)

1, 3.1, 3.3-3.5, 3.7, and Annex 2

2.12 and 5.13

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

According to the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, the G-CTApp, and the G-GMP-GDP, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is responsible for authorizing the manufacture of investigational products (IPs) (known as investigational medicinal products (IMPs) in the United Kingdom (UK)) to be used in a trial. A Manufacturer’s Authorization for Investigational Medicinal Products (MIA(IMP)) must be obtained by the person responsible for the manufacture of any IP to be used in the trial. The sponsor or the designated representative must include a copy of the MIA(IMP) in the clinical trial application submission to the MHRA. The applicant must complete the form listed in GBR-28 to obtain an MIA(IMP) from the MHRA. The MHCTR defines “manufacturing authorization” to include importing and assembly authorizations, as applicable. The G-CTApp states that if an IP is manufactured outside the European Union (EU), the clinical trial application should include an MIA(IMP), importer authorization, and qualified person (QP) declaration on good manufacturing practice (GMP) for each site. The MHRA will approve the manufacture or import of an IP after the clinical trial application has been approved.

Per G-ATMP, a manufacturer’s license from MHRA is needed to manufacture unlicensed advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) in the UK. See G-ATMP for guidance on the two (2) ATMP manufacturer license pathways: the hospital exemption or the “specials” scheme.

As per the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, the G-GMP-GDP, and GBR-15, and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), the MIA(IMP) holder must also comply with the GMP guidelines and provide an IMP Certificate of Analysis. In addition, the MHCTR and the MHCTR2006 specify that the holder of an MIA(IMP) must always have the services of at least one (1) QP at their disposal. The QP must satisfy the qualification and experience requirements delineated in the aforementioned sources. The QP’s primary legal responsibility is to certify batches of IPs prior to use in a clinical trial, or prior to release for sale and placement in the market. See Part 6 and Schedule 6 of the MHCTR for detailed applicant requirements.

In accordance with the G-ImportIMPs, IPs that have been QP-certified in countries on the list of approved countries (initially, EU and European Economic Area (EEA) countries per G-CTApprovedCountries) do not need to be re-certified when importing to the UK. However, the sponsor must require the MIA(IMP) holder to put in place an assurance system to check these IMPs have been certified by a QP in a listed country before release to the trial. A sponsor may perform verification of QP certification in a listed country themselves if they are the holder of a UK MIA(IMP). Alternatively, they may outsource this verification to a third party who holds a UK MIA(IMP). IPs coming to Great Britain from Northern Ireland do not require this additional oversight. IPs coming directly to the UK from third-party countries that are not on the list of approved countries will continue to require import and QP certification in the UK by the MIA(IMP) holder as per the existing requirements. See the G-ImportIMPsAuth, for additional details on the authorizations and procedures. For additional details on what is new from Brexit, see the Scope of Assessment section.

The G-IPsNIreland delineates that the supply and use of IPs in Northern Ireland must follow EU laws as per the Northern Ireland Protocol. For policy papers and details on the Northern Ireland Protocol, see GBR-119.

Per the G-SubtlAmndmt, for any change to IP manufacturing, importation, or certification relevant to the supply of IPs in an ongoing UK trial, a substantial amendment must be submitted to the MHRA. However, if the sponsor chooses to retain an existing UK release site for the ongoing UK trial but includes an additional EU/EEA site for trials in the EU/EEA only, then no substantial amendment to the MHRA will be required.

Please note: The UK is party to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing (GBR-5), 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 GBR-48.

Application for New Manufacturer’s Authorization for Investigational Medicinal Products MIA (IMP) (Human Use)

Annex 2

Manufacture of unlicensed ATMPs in the UK

Documents to send with your application

Overview

Amendment of Regulation 13 of the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Regulation 42 of the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Regulation 44 of the Principal Regulations; and Part 2 (Principles based on Articles 2 to 5 of the GCP Directive, Conditions Based on Article 3 of the Directive and Amendment of Schedule 6 to the Principal Regulations)

Part 1 (2), Part 3 (13), Part 6, Schedule 1 (Part 2), Schedule 3 (Part 2), Schedule 6, and Schedule 7

Quality Requirements

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Investigator's Brochure

In accordance with the G-CTAProcsVacBiol and the G-CTARevVacBiol, the Malawi government requires the sponsor to provide investigators with an Investigator’s Brochure (IB). Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). MWI-22 specifies that the IB must contain all of the relevant information on the investigational product(s) (IPs) (also referred to as investigational medicinal products (IMPs) in Malawi) obtained through the earlier research phases, including preclinical, toxicological, safety, efficacy, and adverse event data. The sponsor should also update the IB as significant new information becomes available.

As specified in MWI-22, the IB must include the following sections:

Table of Contents
Summary
Introduction
Physical, Chemical, and Pharmaceutical Properties and Formulation
Nonclinical Studies (pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, toxicology, and metabolism profiles)
Effects in Humans (pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, metabolism, and pharmacodynamics; safety and efficacy; and regulatory and post-marketing experiences)
Summary of Data and Guidance for the Investigator(s)

See MWI-22 for detailed content guidelines.

Quality Management

MWI-60 requires that an Investigational Medicinal Product Dossier (IMPD) or alternative be submitted in the clinical trial application to the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA). The IMPD must include information on the quality of any IP, the manufacture and control of the IP, and data from non-clinical studies and from its clinical use.

As per the G-CTAProcsVacBiol, the G-CTARevVacBiol, and the D-ImprtRelIMPs, the PMRA requires the following documents to accompany the IP (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

Evidence of manufacture under conditions compliant with current good manufacturing practice (GMP)
A release of specifications and tests, including a Certificate of Analysis (CoA) for each batch of IPs, as well as comparator(s), if applicable
A copy of the PMRA’s letter of approval of the clinical trial
Batch release certificate
A copy of a valid Certificate of Manufacture issued by the competent authority in the country of origin
A copy of a valid World Health Organization certificate of a pharmaceutical product issued by the competent authority in the country of origin

The D-ImprtRelIMPs states that the CoA should identify the product name or code; the sponsor/company name; batch numbers; expiration dates; date of issue; signature, qualification, and title of responsible person; and the results of physical and analytical tests. Per MWI-22, the sponsor must maintain a CoA to document the identity, purity, and strength of the IP(s) to be used in the clinical trial.

The sponsor should complete the cover sheet in Annex 1 of the D-ImprtRelIMPs, include it with each IP shipment, and use the checklist in Annex 2 to ensure the required documentation is attached. As delineated in the D-ImprtRelIMPs, the sponsor should also prepare IP shipping instructions, including information about the shipment’s overall physical condition, for PMRA review and approval. The sponsor should provide information on the acceptable storage temperatures and storage conditions.

5, 6, Annex 1, and Annex 2

7 (Checklist of Required Documents (Appendices 2 and 10) and CTA Section 3)

3.2 and Screening Form

5.13, 5.14, 7, and 8.2

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Investigator’s Brochure

In accordance with the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, and GBR-92, the sponsor or the designated representative is responsible for providing investigators with an Investigator’s Brochure (IB), which must contain all of the relevant information on the investigational product(s) (IPs) (known as investigational medicinal products (IMPs) in the United Kingdom (UK)) obtained through the earlier research phases, including preclinical, toxicological, safety, efficacy, and adverse events data. The sponsor or the designated representative should also update the IB as significant new information becomes available.

As specified in the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), the IB must provide coverage of the following areas:

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

See Section 7 of GBR-113 for detailed content guidelines.

Quality Management

Per GBR-113, the sponsor must maintain a Certificate of Analysis to document the identity, purity, and strength of the IP(s) to be used in the clinical trial.

5.12 and 7

Overview

Insertion of Regulation 3A of the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Regulation 13 of the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Regulation 15 of the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Regulation 42 of the Principal Regulations, Amendment of Regulation 44 of the Principal Regulations; and Part 2 Principles based on Articles 2 to 5 of the GCP Directive

Part 1 (2), Part 3 (13), Part 6, Schedule 6, and Schedule 7

Labeling

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Investigational product (IP) labeling in Malawi must comply with the requirements set forth in the D-ImprtRelIMPs. The D-ImprtRelIMPs states that for an IP to be used in a clinical trial, it must be properly labeled in the official language of the country where the trial is being conducted.

As set forth in the D-ImprtRelIMPs, the following labeling information must be included on the outer packaging or on the immediate packaging when there is no outer packaging:

Wording that clearly indicates the IP is clinical trial material
Product name or unique code
Storage temperature and conditions
Expiration date
Sponsor contact details

Additionally, the G-ImpExpMP provides the following minimum labeling requirements for all imported medicines and/or active pharmaceutical ingredient (API):

The information printed on labels must be indelible, engraved, or embossed on a primary and secondary container
The immediate outer packaging of the medicine or API should be clearly labeled in English
The trade or brand name where applicable should be stated
The International Non-Proprietary Name (INN, generic name) should be clearly stated
State quantities of each API in the given formulation or quantities of the raw material
Date of manufacture and expiry or retest date in case of active raw materials
Batch or lot number
Storage conditions
Name and address of manufacturer
Registration number of the product issued by the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA) in both outer and inner package of the product(s) where applicable
Enclosed and accompanying literature must be in English
The specification of the API is given according to officially recognized pharmacopoeia, where applicable

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). The D-ImprtRelIMPs and MWI-22 state that the IP must be coded and labeled in a manner that protects the blinding, if applicable.

5.13

4

3.3

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Labeling for investigational products (IPs) (known as investigational medicinal products (IMPs) in the United Kingdom (UK)) must comply with the requirements set forth in the MHCTR, the MHCTR2006, GBR-15, the EU Good Manufacturing Practice Directive (GBR-12), and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113). Per GBR-12, labeling for IPs must ensure protection of the participant and traceability, to enable identification of the product and trial, and to facilitate proper use of the IP. As specified in GBR-15, for an IP to be used in a clinical trial, it must be properly labeled in the official language of the country where the trial is being conducted.

As set forth in GBR-15, the following labeling information must be included on the primary package label (or any intermediate packaging), and the outer packaging:

Name, address, and telephone number of the sponsor, contract research organization (CRO), or investigator
Pharmaceutical dosage form, route of administration, quantity of dosage units, and in the case of open trials, the name/identifier and strength/concentration
Batch and/or code number to identify the contents and packaging operation
Trial reference code allowing identification of the trial, site, investigator, and sponsor (if not given elsewhere)
Trial participant identification number/treatment number and where relevant, the visit number
Investigator name (if not already included above)
Instructions 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 indicating the IP is clinical trial material
Storage conditions
Expiration date (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 not going to be taken home by participants

As per the MHCTR, a sample of the labeling is required as part of the clinical trial application submission. (See the Submission Content section for detailed clinical trial application submission requirements). Furthermore, according to GBR-15, the IP must also be suitably packaged in a manner that will prevent contamination and unacceptable deterioration during transport and storage.

Article 15

Annex 1-3 - Investigational Medicinal Products - Packaging, Labelling, and Table 1

5.13

Amendment of Regulation 46 of the Principal Regulations

Part 1 (2) and Part 7, and Schedule 3, Part 2 (12)

Product Management

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Supply, Storage, and Handling Requirements

Per MWI-25, clinical trials in Malawi are required to follow the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (MWI-22). As defined in the D-ImprtRelIMPs and MWI-22, the sponsor must also supply the investigator(s)/institution(s) with the investigational product(s) (IP(s)), including the comparator(s) and placebo, if applicable. The sponsor should not supply either party with the IP(s) until after obtaining Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA) and ethics committee approvals.

The D-ImprtRelIMPs and MWI-22 indicate that IPs must be suitably packaged in a manner that will prevent contamination and unacceptable deterioration during transport and storage. Additionally, 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):

IP product quality and stability over the period of use
IP is manufactured according to any applicable good manufacturing practice (GMP)
Proper coding, packaging, and labeling of the IP(s)
Records are maintained for document shipment, receipt, disposition, return, and destruction of the IP(s)
Acceptable storage temperatures, conditions, and times for the IP

Timely delivery of the IP(s)
Written procedures are established, including instructions for handling and storage of the IP(s), adequate and safe receipt of the IP(s), dispensing of the IP(s), retrieval of unused IP(s), return of unused IP(s) to the sponsor, and disposal of unused IP(s) by the sponsor
Sufficient quantities of the IP(s) are maintained to reconfirm specifications, should this become necessary

Refer to the D-ImprtRelIMPs for detailed sponsor-related IP requirements.

In addition, the PharmG-InvestDrugs states that the pharmacist at each clinical trial site, designated as the Pharmacist of Record, is the primary individual who is expected to develop and maintain an IP control system, which includes the technical procedures for product ordering, control, dispensing, and accountability. In addition, the Pharmacist of Record is responsible for the establishment of internal policies and procedures for the safe and proper use of IPs. The Pharmacist of Record will perform the day-to-day dispensing and accountability activities. A pharmacy plan must be created by the Pharmacist of Record for each clinical research site, addressing the control and use of IPs. See the PharmG-InvestDrugs for more information.

Record Requirements

In accordance with the D-ImprtRelIMPs, the sponsor is required to maintain a system for retrieving IP(s) and document this retrieval process (e.g., for deficient product recall, reclaim after trial completion, expired product reclaim). The sponsor must also maintain a system for the disposition of unused IP(s) and for the documentation of this disposition. Finally, the sponsor should maintain sufficient quantities of the IP(s) used in the trial to reconfirm specifications, should this become necessary, and maintain records of batch sample analyses and characteristics. Moreover, 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.

G-GMP-MWI requires that for IPs, the batch documentation must be retained for at least five (5) years after the completion or formal discontinuation of the last clinical trial in which the batch was used. Additionally, the G-ImpExpMP indicates that upon issuance of import authorization by the PMRA, the importer is expected to retain such records for five (5) years from the date of importation, either as hard or electronic copies. Stored import records should be easily accessible and availed for review to the PMRA’s inspector/officers for any post-import audit or investigations.

1, 3, 4, and 5

2.2.4

Pharmacy Plan

3.3

2.12, 5.5, 5.12-5.14, and 7

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Supply, Storage, and Handling Requirements

As defined in the MHCTR and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (GBR-113), the sponsor must supply the investigator(s)/institution(s) with the investigational product(s) (IPs) (known as investigational medicinal products (IMPs) in the United Kingdom (UK)), including the comparator(s) and placebo, if applicable. The sponsor should not supply either party with the IP(s) until obtaining Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) approval and a favorable opinion from a recognized ethics committee (EC).

Per the MHCTR and GBR-113, 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):

IP product quality and stability over the period of use
IP manufactured according to good manufacturing practice guidance (G-GMP-GDP and GBR-15)
Proper coding, packaging, and labeling of the IP(s)
IP use record including information on the quantity, loading, shipment, receipt, dispensing, handling, reclamation, and destruction of the unused IP
Acceptable storage temperatures, conditions, and times for the IP
Written procedures including instructions for handling and storage of the IP, adequate and safe receipt, dispensing, retrieval of unused IP(s), and return of unused IP(s) to the sponsor
Timely delivery of the IP(s)
Establishment of management and filing systems for the IPs
Sufficient quantities of the IP for the trial

As delineated in GBR-15, IPs should remain under the control of the sponsor until after completion of a two-step procedure: certification by the Qualified Person (QP) and release by the sponsor for use in a clinical trial. Both steps should be recorded and retained in the relevant trial files held by or on behalf of the sponsor. Shipping of IPs should be conducted according to instructions given by or on behalf of the sponsor in the shipping order. De-coding arrangements should be available to the appropriate responsible personnel before IPs are shipped to the investigator site. A detailed inventory of the shipments made by the manufacturer or importer should be maintained and include the addressees’ identification.

Refer to the MHCTR and GBR-113 for detailed, sponsor-related IP requirements.

To help ensure the continuity of supply of medicines for clinical trials from January 1, 2021, the BrexitLtr-IPs indicates that the UK will unilaterally recognize certain European Union (EU) regulatory processes for a time-limited period. This recognition is known as “standstill.”

Record Requirements

As per GBR-113, the sponsor should inform the investigator(s) and institution(s) in writing of the need for record retention and should notify the investigator(s) and institution(s) in writing when the trial-related pharmacy records are no longer needed. Additionally, the sponsor must ensure sufficient quantities of the IP(s) used in the trial to reconfirm specifications, should this become necessary, and should maintain records of batch sample analyses and characteristics.

As set forth in GBR-113, sponsor-specific essential documents should be retained until at least two (2) years after the last approval of a marketing application, until there are no pending or contemplated marketing applications, or at least two (2) years have elapsed since the formal discontinuation of the IP’s clinical development. The sponsor should inform the investigator(s) and the institution(s) in writing when trial-related records are no longer needed.

However, per the MHCTR2006, the sponsor and the chief investigator must ensure that the documents contained in the trial master file are retained for at least five (5) years following the trial’s completion. The documents must be readily available to the MHRA upon request and be complete and legible. The sponsor should ensure that trial participant medical files are also retained for at least five (5) years after the trial’s conclusion.

Annex 13 – Investigational Medicinal Products – Packaging, Labelling

5.12-5.15, 5.5, and 7

Insertion of Regulation 3A of the Principal Regulations; Amendment of Regulation 15 of the Principal Regulations; and Amendment of Regulation 31 of the Principal Regulations

Part 3 (13 and 15), Part 4 (28), Part 6 (36 and 38), and Schedule 7 (Parts 2 and 3)

Definition of Specimen

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

In Malawi, as per the G-StorExptSpecimens, specimens are defined as human or animal materials, collected directly from humans or animals, including, but not limited to excreta, secreta, blood and its components; tissue and tissue fluid swabs; and body parts being transported for purposes such as research and investigational activities.

Specimens are also referred to as human materials or biological products. The G-StorExptSpecimens defines human material as all biological material of human origin, including organs, tissues, bodily fluids, teeth, hair, nails, and substances extracted from such material as DNA or RNA.

Please refer to G-StorExptSpecimens for more specific definitions for selected terms including genetically modified micro-organisms and infectious substances.

5.4-5.6

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

The term “specimen” is not referenced within the United Kingdom (UK). However, the following terms are used relating to specimens:

Relevant material: As per the UK-HTA, Code-E, GBR-73, and GBR-76, “relevant material” or “human tissue” is any material from a human body, other than gametes, that consists of, or includes, cells. This also includes blood (except where held for transplantation). Hair and nails from living persons are specifically excluded from this definition, as are gametes and embryos outside the body.
Bodily material: UK-HTA and GBR-64 defines “bodily material” as material from a human body that consists of, or includes, human cells. Unlike relevant material, this includes gametes, embryos outside the human body, and hair and nails from the body.
Tissue: GBR-64 defines “tissue” as any human material (e.g., blood, biopsies, urine) and includes relevant and bodily material.

Bodily Material and Tissues

Definition of Relevant Material

Glossary

Part 3 (45 and 53)

Specimen Import & Export

Last content review/update: August 29, 2024

Import/Export

As delineated in the G-CTAProcsVacBiol, MWI-14, and MWI-7, the applicant must obtain approval from the Pharmacy and Medicines Regulatory Authority (PMRA) to import and export human biological specimens into and out of Malawi. The G-CTAProcsVacBiol notes that the applicant may apply to the PMRA for permission to import and/or export materials at the same time that the applicant submits the clinical trial application.

The G-StorExptSpecimens specifies that the sponsor is responsible for shipping specimens, for preparing the required documentation (e.g., nationally authorized import/export permits and dispatch/shipping documents), and for ensuring that the samples collected from research participants are sent through the appropriate carrier to their destination. The sponsor may delegate these functions to the principal investigator (PI). Refer to Annex 1 of the G-StorExptSpecimens for a checklist to be completed by the PI for the proper storage and export of clinical trial samples. As per the G-StorExptSpecimens, the transport of specimens is subject to regulation by the International Air Transport Association.

In cases where investigators are unable to complete all required research tests in Malawi, MWI-14 and MWI-7 state that justification must be provided for the importation and exportation of samples.

Per the G-GenResReqs, the National Health Sciences Research Committee (NHSRC) requires investigators who wish to export biological/genetic materials to apply for a transfer under a material transfer agreement (MTA) that must be reviewed, approved, and signed for by NHSRC. The investigator must provide a satisfactory description of how the privacy and confidentiality of the individuals and communities and the safety of such materials will be maintained. Furthermore, an investigator is not permitted to transfer biological/genetic material to another research group locally and internationally unless NHSRC has approved a collaborative study between the two (2) parties and the material and information provided protects the participants. Additionally, as stated in the SciTechOrder, an NCST-issued license is required for the collection, storage, and use of human samples for research. The SciTechOrder does not specify whether the process of obtaining an NCST-issued license is separate from the NHSRC requirements described above.

Material Transfer Agreement

MWI-14, MWI-16, and MWI-7 indicate that the PMRA, the NHSRC, and the College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC) must ensure a MTA is in place that includes the following:

Intention of the importation and exportation of samples
Duration and location of storage
Appropriate informed consent authorizing the exportation and importation
Person(s) who will have access to the samples
The controlling officer of the samples
Ownership of the samples
Capacity building (only applicable for MWI-7)

See MWI-14, MWI-16, and MWI-7 for the PMRA, NHSRC, and COMREC MTA forms, respectively.

The G-BioSampCompense also confirms that MTAs remain an instrument to be used by a researcher in requesting the approval of an ethics committee (EC) for the transfer of samples for analysis outside of Malawi.

Other Considerations

According to the G-GenResReqs and MWI-6, COMREC and NHSRC-approved samples can be stored for a maximum of five (5) years during which time all tests/analyses approved for that particular study should be concluded. MWI-6 further states that if the sample is to be used beyond five (5) years, an updated authorization must be provided, which will last another five (5) years before it can be renewed. Per G-BioSampCompense, while samples are primarily allowed to be stored as long as they are needed for the initial study, leftover samples are also permitted to be stored as long as needed for a research endeavor. See G-BioSampCompense for additional details regarding EC approval requirements.

(a)(iv) to (ix)

3, 5, and 7 (Checklist of Required Documents (Fees))

4.12

3, 6.4, and Annex 1

Last content review/update: May 16, 2024

Import/Export

As specified in the UK-HTA, the Human Tissue Authority (HTA) has jurisdiction regarding the import and export of specimens (known as “relevant materials” or “human tissue” in the United Kingdom (UK)) and complies with the Code of Practice on import and export set forth in Code-E. According to the UK-HTA, Code-E, GBR-56, GBR-73, and GBR-52, the import and export of relevant material/human tissue is not in itself a licensable activity under the UK-HTA. However, once the material is imported, storage of this material may be licensable unless it is for a specific research project with ethical approval from an ethics committee (EC). GBR-73 explains that it is preferable for imported human tissue to be stored in a licensed establishment where possible, and if so, there is no requirement for EC approval to undertake research. However, if the premises where the human tissue will be held are not covered by a HTA license, each research project using the human tissue will require EC approval.

If relevant material/human tissue is being imported or exported for an application, the HTRegs specify that this must be carried out under the authority of a license or third-party agreement with an establishment licensed by the HTA to store material for human application. See G-Tissues-Brexit for guidance on Brexit-related regulatory changes that apply to the movement of human tissues and cells between Great Britain, Northern Ireland, and Europe. Establishments importing or exporting human tissues and cells intended for human application may require an HTA license covering these activities. For additional help, clinical trial staff should contact the HTA at enquiries@hta.gov.uk. For more information about Brexit, see the Scope of Assessment section.

Code-E requires imported and exported material to be procured, used, handled, stored, transported, and disposed of in accordance with the donor’s consent. In addition, due regard should be given to safety considerations, and with the dignity and respect accorded to human bodies, body parts, and tissue as delineated in Code-E. Any individual or organization wishing to import human bodies, body parts, and tissue into England, Wales, or Northern Ireland must comply with the guidelines set forth in Code-E. For exports, donors should be provided with adequate information upon providing consent, that their samples may be transported as exported samples for use abroad. It is the responsibility of the recipient country to ensure that, prior to export, the material is handled appropriately and that the required country standards have been met.

In addition, the G-QualityBlood lists the quality and safety standards when importing or exporting blood into or from the EU/European Economic Area (EEA). The UK maintains the existing quality and safety standards for the collection, testing, processing, storage, and distribution of human blood and blood components. The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) should be consulted before importing or exporting blood or blood components. See the G-QualityBlood for relevant EU quality and safety directives.

Human Tissues, Cells, and Blood as Starting Material

Per G-ATMP, if tissues and cells are being used as starting materials in a medicinal product, the donation, procurement, and testing of the cells are covered by the HTRegs under the authority of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) for the use of gametes and embryos, which may be used in the derivation (development) of cells in the manufacture of advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs), and under HTA for the licensing and inspection for all other tissues and cells. Once the starting materials have been made available, medicines legislation applies to and is regulated by the MHRA.

Per G-ATMP, the HTA and the MHRA have agreed that the collection of blood as a starting material for an ATMP can be carried out under either a tissues and cells license or a blood establishment license.

Other Considerations

As set forth in the UK-HTA, the HTRegs, and GBR-9, the HTA also regulates the storage and use of specimens from the living, and the removal, storage, use, and licensing of relevant materials/human tissue from the deceased for specified health-related purposes in the UK. The UK-HTA refers to specified purposes as “scheduled purposes.” Per GBR-9, the HTA and the Health Research Authority (HRA) have agreed to collaborative arrangements in a Memorandum of Understanding.

Note that per GBR-9 and GBR-105, an HTA license is not needed for the storage of specimens for certain research projects that have been approved by an ethics committee (EC). The HTA and the UK Health Departments’ Research Ethics Service (RES) (GBR-62) have agreed that an EC can give generic ethical approval for a research tissue bank’s arrangements for collection, storage, and release of specimens, provided the specimens in the bank are stored on HTA-licensed premises. This approval can extend to specific projects receiving non-identifiable tissue from the bank. The specimens do not then need to be stored on HTA-licensed premises, nor do they need project-specific ethical approval. However, a license is required for specimens stored for which there is no ethical approval (e.g., in large biobanks).

Per the UK-HTA, the G-QAHumTissue, and Code-E, the scope of the UK-HTA provisions specifically cover England, Northern Ireland, and Wales. The UK-HTA licensing requirements do not apply in Scotland, with the exception of those provisions relating to the use of DNA. Scotland complies with the Scotland-AnatAct and the Scotland-HTA for the removal, retention, use, licensing, and import of human organs, tissue, and tissue samples specifically removed post mortem, and subsequently used for research. Per GBR-52, the Scotland-HTA does not regulate the use of tissue from the living for research.

Section 12 and Annex H

1 and 3

Import and Export of Tissue

Human tissues and cells in ATMPs and Blood and blood components in medicinal products

Introduction to the Human Tissue Authority Codes of Practice, Licensing – Import and Export, Licensing – HTA Licensing Standards, and Annex A

Glossary/Definitions, Import and Export

Part 5 (53 (6))

Section 3 - Licenses and Section 7 - Licenses - general provisions

Part 2 (13, 14, 16, 26, and 41)

Part 1 (6), and Part 2 (7), and Part 3

Consent for Specimen