Abstract:1572 Background: In addition to being required by the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects for United States-based institutions that receive federal funding and are engaged in cooperative research projects, the use of a central Institutional Review Board (cIRB) has multiple benefits. Yet more advanced trial designs have unique needs and challenges that may hinder adoption of an efficient cIRB. Platform trials, which require both a master protocol and successive individual protocol amendments for each new agent, are prone to high regulatory burden that can slow trial recruitment, representing a significant workload for study personnel. Specific challenges for platform trials include high burden of new amendments and IRB review schedules staggered across sites, making it challenging to have all sites operating under the same amendment concurrently. Methods: Administrative assessments were collected over the course of the I-SPY2 trial. The primary outcome of interest was time from amendment submission to approval (calculated as the number of days from submission to the local IRB by the site investigators to approval by the local IRB). Quantitative data in terms of hours spent on regulatory tasks pre- and post-cIRB implementation was estimated. Site investigators were asked in December 2022 to complete a brief questionnaire to investigate perceptions on changes to workload and level of comfort using a cIRB. Results: Amendments were activated when 50% of high accruing sites had IRB approval. The number of sites with approval for an amendment to go live was < 25% prior to cIRB adoption, and 83% after. Following transition to the cIRB in February 2021, the mean time from amendment submission to approval decreased from 54.4 to 20.7 days by Jan 2023. Changes to the informed consent were possible once the cIRB was adopted, including: standardizing site-specific IRB language in a section of the consent, so it need not be adjusted with every new agent amendment; standardizing site-specific workflows; shortening consent and making it more patient friendly. The average time that CRCs spent on regulatory work at each site decreased by an average of 160 minutes, but was variable, revealing continued use of local IRB, other committees at some sites. A total of 14 respondents completed the survey; most respondents indicated that keeping up with the amendment approval process was easier post-cIRB and 94% were comfortable relying on a cIRB. The short time for cIRB approval revealed the inefficiency of other processes, including coverage analysis and building of drug order sets. Conclusions: Active engagement of cIRB leadership and IRB working group has enabled regulatory review that now takes less than 30 days. The cIRB is now the standard for the I-SPY family of trials. Other services can also be shared and will continue to drive efficiency and reduce the regulatory burden for sites.

Practical guidance for running late-phase platform protocols for clinical trials: lessons from experienced UK clinical trials units

MIDAS: a Practical Bayesian Design for Platform Trials with Molecularly Targeted Agents

Regulatory Issues of Platform Trials: Learnings from EU‐PEARL

Practice and Consideration of Master Protocol in Clinical Trials

Systematic review of basket trials, umbrella trials, and platform trials: a landscape analysis of master protocols

Current Statistical Considerations and Regulatory Perspectives on the Planning of Confirmatory Basket, Umbrella, and Platform Trials

A Bayesian Platform Trial Design to Simultaneously Evaluate Multiple Drugs in Multiple Indications with Mixed Endpoints.

Master protocols in Low-and-Middle income countries: A review of current use, limitations and opportunities for precision medicine

Time to STEP UP: methods and findings from the development of guidance to help researchers design inclusive clinical trials

Design of platform trials with a change in the control treatment arm

Next generation clinical trials: Seamless designs and master protocols

BOIN Suite: A Software Platform to Design and Implement Novel Early-Phase Clinical Trials

Developing generic templates to shape the future for conducting integrated research platform trials

A preplanned multi-stage platform trial for discovering multiple superior treatments with control of FWER and power

Design Considerations for a Phase II platform trial in Major Depressive Disorder

A multi-arm multi-stage platform design that allows pre-planned addition of arms while still controlling the family-wise error

Group sequential designs for pragmatic clinical trials with early outcomes: methods and guidance for planning and implementation

Streamlining regulatory review in a multicenter platform trial: Opportunity to enhance patient centered care and drive innovation and efficiency.

Combining factorial and multi-arm multi-stage platform designs to evaluate multiple interventions efficiently

The Rise of Adaptive Platform Trials in Critical Care

The use of master protocols for efficient trial design to evaluate radiotherapy interventions: a systematic review