ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2026
Lessons and Insights from a Case Study on Clinical Trial Fraud.
Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The United States Food and Drug Administration Good Clinical Practice inspections play a critical role in safeguarding the rights, safety, and welfare of participants, verifying trial data, and ensuring regulatory compliance. Clinical trial fraud poses a serious threat to data integrity, undermines the reliability of regulatory decisions, and can jeopardize the protection of trial participants. This paper presents a case study of clinical trial fraud uncovered during preparations for a Food and Drug Administration inspection. It details the fraudulent activities committed, their impact on data integrity, and the consequences for the marketing application, and offers lessons learned and insights for preventing and detecting fraud in clinical trials. It emphasizes the application of Quality by Design principles by identifying critical factors that underpin clinical trial quality and designing and conducting the trials to protect those trial attributes. Additionally, it highlights the importance of risk-based strategies in monitoring, trial oversight, and the design and management of electronic systems. It also underscores the importance of reporting suspected clinical trial fraud to the Food and Drug Administration promptly. In this case, the Sponsor’s delay in reporting the fraudulent activities postponed the Food and Drug Administration’s investigation and ultimately extended the Prescription Drug User Fee Act timeline by three months.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41803563What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.