Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Am Heart J. 2015 Feb;169(2):197-204. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2014.11.003. Epub 2014 Nov 10.

Centralized adjudication of cardiovascular end points in cardiovascular and noncardiovascular pharmacologic trials: a report from the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium.

Author information

  • 1ACI Clinical, Bala Cynwyd, PA. Electronic address:
  • 2Quintiles, Durham, NC.
  • 3Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Tarrytown, NY.
  • 4Cardiovascular Working Party, European Medicines Agency, London, UK.
  • 5Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA.
  • 6University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington, CT.
  • 7GlaxoSmith Kline Pharmaceuticals Inc, Upper Providence, PA.
  • 8US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD.


This white paper provides a summary of presentations and discussions at a cardiovascular (CV) end point adjudication think tank cosponsored by the Cardiac Safety Research Committee and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that was convened at the FDA's White Oak headquarters on November 6, 2013. Attention was focused on the lack of clarity concerning the need for end point adjudication in both CV and non-CV trials: there is currently an absence of widely accepted academic or industry standards and a definitive regulatory policy on how best to structure and use clinical end point committees (CECs). This meeting therefore provided a forum for leaders in the fields of CV clinical trials and CV safety to develop a foundation of initial best practice recommendations for use in future CEC charters. Attendees included representatives from pharmaceutical companies, regulatory agencies, end point adjudication specialist groups, clinical research organizations, and active, academically based adjudicators. The manuscript presents recommendations from the think tank regarding when CV end point adjudication should be considered in trials conducted by cardiologists and by noncardiologists as well as detailing key issues in the composition of a CEC and its charter. In addition, it presents several recommended best practices for the establishment and operation of CECs. The science underlying CV event adjudication is evolving, and suggestions for additional areas of research will be needed to continue to advance this science. This manuscript does not constitute regulatory guidance.

Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk