NIHR Centre Creates New IMP Transfer Process With Potential To Scale Across UK
By Elizabeth Urbanek, Executive Editor
The NIHR Commercial Research Delivery Centre in Primary Care in Cheshire and Merseyside has established a new process for transferring investigational medicinal product (IMP) between clinical trial sites. The model was developed with a trial sponsor and two primary care sites, Ashfields Primary Care Centre and Kiltearn Medical Centre.
The goal? To be able to move IMP between participating sites through a fully governed process, rather than treating each site's supply as completely separate. The CRDC says the approach could help bring clinical research closer to patients and potentially be scaled across the UK.
Moving IMP between sites takes more than getting the product from one location to another. The sites needed a defined process for making the transfer while maintaining the governance and accountability required for clinical trials.
It also raises a practical supply question. If one site has IMP and another needs it, could that inventory be transferred instead of sending additional product through the supply chain?
The announcement does not provide details on the specific inventory controls, temperature requirements or reconciliation processes used for the transfer. Those details matter, but what is significant is that the sites now have a formal process for moving IMP between them.
Why Clinical Supply Should Care
Clinical supply plans are built around assumptions about where patients will enroll and where investigational product will be needed. When those assumptions change, some sites may have more inventory than they need while others need more.
A governed site-to-site transfer process gives clinical supply teams another option. Instead of sending additional product through the distribution network, existing IMP at one site could potentially be used to meet demand at another.
That could affect how teams think about inventory, distribution, accountability and waste. It also ties site-level enrollment more directly to decisions about where supply is available and where it is needed.
The source does not tell us how broadly the model can be applied or what specific controls would be required for different types of IMP.
We should not assume that a site-to-site transfer model will work the same way across every trial.
What we do know is that the traditional assumption that IMP moves into a site and stays there is being challenged by a formal process designed to move product between participating sites.
The Supply Question
When demand changes at the site level, could moving existing IMP between participating sites provide a more flexible alternative to sending additional supply through the distribution network?
Related CSL Editorial: When Clinical Supply Plans Meet Site Reality: Lessons From The Front Line
About The Author:
Elizabeth Urbanek is the Executive Editor for Clinical Supply Leader, where she works with clinical trial supply and logistics professionals across pharma and biotech to bring real-world perspectives, operational challenges, trends, scientific insights and regulatory strategy to the field.
Before joining life sciences media, Elizabeth spent more than 15 years in broadcast, digital and live-event storytelling, helping highly technical teams communicate complex ideas with clarity and impact. She brings that same approach to clinical supply, creating editorial space for experts to share what is happening across clinical trial operations.
Elizabeth is passionate about connecting people and ideas, identifying emerging themes and showcasing work that can move the clinical supply field forward.