| Table 2 Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Local and Central Laboratories |
| Local Laboratory | Central Laboratory |
 |
|
|
|
|
Perceived advantages to the investigator: |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Fully conversant with laboratory operation, fully conversant with reporting style |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
No sample transportation delay |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
No sample preparation |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Fast reporting time |
|
|
|
|  |
|
|
|
|
Perceived advantages to the investigator: |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
''Special test'' data available quickly |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Local laboratory audit not required |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Local archiving not required |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Laboratory operating to principles of GLP |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Perceived advantages to the sponsor: |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
The investigator has confidence in his laboratory |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
No transportation cost |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Fast local reporting time for safety data |
|
|
|
|  |
|
|
|
|
Perceived advantages to the sponsor: |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
No "special test" data constraints |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Consistent methodology across multiple sites |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Consistent reporting |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Laboratory operating to principles of GLP |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Complete audit trial |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Single analytical charge |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Data validation at source |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Electronic data may be available |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Improved data integration and statistical analysis |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Single laboratory site audit |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Complete study overview |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Close monitoring of adverse events |
|
|
|
|
Perceived disadvantages to the investigator:
 |
|
|
|
|
"Special test" data availability constraints |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Local laboratory audit may be required |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Local archiving will be required for minimum of 15 years |
|
|
|
|  |
|
|
|
|
Perceived disadvantages to the investigator: |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Not confident with the system |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Not conversant with laboratory operation |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Unfamiliar with reporting style |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Unfamiliar with reporting units |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Sample preparation required before transportation |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Sample transportation procedures to be followed |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Delay in data reporting |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Perceived disadvantages to the sponsor: |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
"Special test" data availability constraints |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Inconsistent methodology across multiple sites |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Inconsistent reporting style |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Integration of data very time consuming |
|
|
|
|  |
|
|
|
|
Perceived disadvantages to the sponsor: |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Investigator uncomfortable with the system |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Investigator training required |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Sample transportation cost |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Clinical Research Associate training required |
|
|
|
|