Scale your safety operations as your pipeline grows
A safety system has to be in place before first-in-human dosing and still fit when you are running six studies, have out-licensed a programme, and are preparing a first marketing authorisation. PVgenix covers clinical-trial safety and post-marketing on one platform, so growth is configuration rather than replacement.
What makes clinical-stage safety different
Biotech safety operations are not a smaller version of post-marketing pharmacovigilance — they are a different shape. The volumes are lower, the timelines are tighter, blinding integrity is a hard requirement, and the whole operation has to change shape repeatedly as the pipeline moves.
The system is needed before the first patient
Safety reporting obligations begin with the first dose, not at approval. That puts a system, its qualification, and the SOPs around it on the critical path to a study start — a timeline most enterprise implementations cannot meet.
SUSARs on a 7-day clock
Fatal and life-threatening SUSARs carry the tightest expedited timeline in pharmacovigilance. Identifying them reliably against the reference safety information, and reporting to the right authorities and ethics committees, is unforgiving of manual tracking.
Blinding integrity versus safety assessment
The processing team must not see treatment assignment, yet some assessments require it. Handling that with a shared spreadsheet or an ad-hoc email to the unblinded pharmacovigilance physician is a data-integrity exposure.
Every protocol has its own rules
Reporting obligations differ per study — by design, by region, by sponsor agreement. Encoding that per protocol matters more in clinical work than in post-marketing, where market rules are comparatively stable.
Out-licensing creates an exchange obligation overnight
The moment a programme is partnered, safety data exchange and reconciliation with the partner becomes a contractual duty — and it is a common inspection finding precisely because it appears suddenly.
Diligence looks at your safety operation
Fundraising, partnering, and acquisition diligence all examine safety data and the system holding it. "We track it in spreadsheets" is a finding in a data room as much as in an inspection.
PVgenix supports clinical-trial and post-marketing cases on the same case structure and the same audit trail — SUSAR identification and expedited handling, a controlled blinding and unblinding workflow, study and protocol configuration with study-specific reporting rules, DSUR support, and partner reconciliation when a programme is out-licensed — and it is provisioned in days, so a system is not the thing holding up a study start.
Built for the clinical-stage workload
The clinical-specific mechanics, plus the post-marketing capability waiting for you when a programme reaches approval.
SUSAR identification and expedited handling
Suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions identified from study cases and routed to expedited handling, with the regulatory clock started automatically and deadlines tracked per obligation.
See how it worksBlinding and unblinding workflow
Treatment assignment stays blinded to the processing team until a controlled unblinding step is performed — and that step, and who performed it, is recorded on the audit trail.
See how it worksStudy and protocol configuration
Study-specific reporting rules, reference safety information, and expedited criteria configured per protocol, so adding a study is a configuration task rather than a system change.
See how it worksExpectedness against the RSI in force
Version-controlled reference safety information, so an unexpectedness determination — the U in SUSAR — is always traceable to the document version applicable on the assessment date.
See how it worksDSUR support
Development Safety Update Report outputs built from your study case population at the data lock point, with line listings and cumulative and interval tabulations traceable back to the cases behind them.
See how it worksExpedited submission routes
E2B(R2)/E2B(R3) generation and CIOMS I output with a built-in AS2 gateway and acknowledgement reconciliation, plus a configurable rules engine for per-study, per-region obligations.
See how it worksPartner reconciliation after out-licensing
Licence-partner case reconciliation and clinical-versus-safety database reconciliation with a discrepancy resolution workflow — the obligations that arrive with a partnering deal.
See how it worksPost-marketing capability, already there
Multi-channel spontaneous intake, literature monitoring, signal detection, and PBRER/PSUR support are part of the same platform, so a first approval does not mean a first migration.
See how it worksWhy this fits a growing pipeline
The risk for a biotech is picking a system sized for today and replatforming twice before commercialisation. These are the properties that avoid that.
Clinical and post-marketing on the same record
Study cases and spontaneous cases share one case structure, one audit trail, and one set of SOPs. When your first product is approved you configure post-marketing obligations rather than migrating years of clinical safety data into a new system.
Not on the critical path to a study start
The initial platform build takes roughly three days plus three days of setup documentation. IT provisioning is not the bottleneck — your qualification, SOPs, and training are, and knowing that lets you plan the study-start timeline honestly.
Adding a study does not need the vendor
Study identifiers, protocol-specific reporting rules, reference safety information, blinding requirements, and expedited criteria are configured by your team from the admin console — so a new trial does not queue behind a vendor change request.
Diligence-ready evidence
A complete audit trail with attribution and before/after values, electronic signatures, and exportable case histories — the artefacts a partner's or acquirer's diligence team asks for, available without a scramble.
AI on the clerical load, not the judgment
Extraction and coding are AI-accelerated with per-field confidence scoring and mandatory review gates. Causality, expectedness, and seriousness sign-off stay with your qualified personnel — which matters when the safety physician is one person.
Deployment options as partners get particular
Multi-tenant SaaS or a dedicated single-tenant environment with EU, US, or India region hosting — useful when a partnering agreement brings data-residency or isolation requirements with it.
Answers before the demo
The questions that come up in most evaluations. If yours is not here, ask it on the call.
Browse the full FAQSafety reporting obligations begin with the first dose in humans, so the system, its qualification, and the SOPs around it need to be ready before first-in-human dosing rather than alongside it. Because expedited SUSAR timelines are short and unforgiving, most teams want the system in place with time for qualification and training before the first patient is enrolled. IT provisioning on PVgenix takes about three days plus three days of setup documentation; your qualification and SOP work sits on top of that and should drive the timeline you plan against.
Study cases are assessed for seriousness and for unexpectedness against the version-controlled reference safety information in force, and cases meeting SUSAR criteria are routed to expedited handling. The regulatory clock determines Day 0 and the applicable expedited timeline per region, deadlines are tracked per obligation with alerts before breach, and the configurable rules engine resolves which authority receives which report in which format. The SUSAR determination itself is a regulated judgment made by your qualified PV personnel.
Treatment assignment remains blinded to the processing team, and unblinding is a controlled workflow step rather than an informal request — when it occurs, who performed it and when is recorded on the audit trail. Blinding requirements are configured per protocol, so studies with different arrangements coexist without a process workaround.
Yes. Study and protocol configuration covers study-specific reporting rules, reference safety information, blinding requirements, and expedited criteria, administered by your team without a code change. That matters more in clinical work than in post-marketing, because obligations vary per protocol by design, by region, and by any partner agreement in place.
Yes. DSUR outputs are generated from your study case population at the data lock point, including line listings and cumulative and interval summary tabulations, with every figure traceable to the case versions included at lock. The authored content and interpretation in the report remain with your qualified PV personnel; the platform supplies the data, the tabulations, and the traceability.
Out-licensing creates a safety data exchange obligation with the partner, usually formalised in a safety data exchange agreement. PVgenix supports licence-partner case reconciliation and clinical-versus-safety database reconciliation with a discrepancy tracking and resolution workflow. Note that the agreement itself — who reports what to whom, on which timeline, and how reconciliation runs — is a pharmacovigilance and legal matter owned by you and your partner, not something the software decides.
No. Post-marketing capability is part of the same platform: multi-channel spontaneous intake, literature monitoring, signal detection, and PBRER/PSUR support. A first marketing authorisation means configuring post-marketing obligations and reference safety information rather than migrating your clinical safety history into a different system — which is the point at which many growing companies otherwise face an expensive replatforming.
See PVgenix against your study plan
Request a 30-minute demo and we will walk through SUSAR handling, blinding, per-protocol rules, and DSUR on your programme.
