Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41312467›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025

The future of Italian phase I trials regulation: lessons from a nationwide survey.

Celeste Cagnazzo, Linda Penolazzi, Stefano Stabile, Veronica Franchina, Irene Federici, Francesca Mannozzi, Alessandra Ferrari, Marta Betti, Sara Testoni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Celeste CagnazzoOspedale Infantile Regina Margherita - AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Linda PenolazziOspedale Infantile Regina Margherita - AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Stefano StabileASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.
Veronica FranchinaA.O. Papardo, Messina, Italy.
Irene FedericiAOU delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Francesca MannozziIRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) "Dino Amadori," Meldola, Italy.
Alessandra FerrariFondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy.
Marta BettiAzienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria "SS Antonio e Biagio e C. Arrigo," Alessandria, Italy.
Sara TestoniIRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) "Dino Amadori," Meldola, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Phase I trials are critical for drug development and require rigorous oversight. In Italy, AIFA Determination 809/2015 introduced mandatory standards and a self-certification model, nearly a decade ago. Its sustainability and impact now warrant reassessment. Methods: A nationwide cross-sectional survey (March-April 2024) was conducted among professionals involved in phase I trials. A 19-item questionnaire explored institutional characteristics, certification processes, quality structures and perceptions of the Determination. Descriptive analyses were performed. Results: Sixty-two professionals responded, mainly Data Managers/Clinical Research Coordinators and Quality Assurance officers. Most centers conducted both industry and non-profit studies. Certification of both clinical units and laboratories was common, but timelines varied widely and preparation was resource-intensive. Over half of inspected centers reported major or critical deviations and voluntary suspensions of certification were not infrequent. Clinical Trial Quality Teams were established in most centers, though key roles were often outsourced. Respondents identified procedure drafting and staff training as the most burdensome requirements and considered parts of the Determination outdated, particularly regarding team composition and personnel qualifications. Comparative references with other European frameworks (e.g., Spain and the United Kingdom) highlight differences in implementation models and timelines. Conclusion: While AIFA Determination 809/2015 has strengthened safety and quality culture, it imposes significant operational burdens, especially on academic institutions. Targeted revision appears necessary to maintain high standards while improving sustainability and competitiveness of Italian phase I research.

Indexed as

autocertificationclinical researchfase Iqualityrequirements

Identifiers

PMID41312467
PMCPMC12647064

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.