Click here to open the filter panel
F
Imported item 13
R
Imported item 14
N
Imported item 15
T
Imported item 16
S
Imported item 17
E
Imported item 18
C
Imported item 19
C
Imported item 2
D
Imported item 20
D
Imported item 21
E
Imported item 22
L
Imported item 23
S
Imported item 24
C
Imported item 25
R
Imported item 26
P
Imported item 27
A
Imported item 28
H
Imported item 29
P
Imported item 3
S
Imported item 30
#
Imported item 31
L
Imported item 32
B
Imported item 33
C
Imported item 34
M
Imported item 35
C
Imported item 36
C
Imported item 37
H
Imported item 38
F
Imported item 39
B
Imported item 4
M
Imported item 40
L
Imported item 41
A
Imported item 42
U
Imported item 43
E
Imported item 44
M
Imported item 45
I
Imported item 46
I
Imported item 47
H
Imported item 48
C
Imported item 49
I
Imported item 5
M
Imported item 50
H
Imported item 6
C
Imported item 7
S
Imported item 8
E
Imported item 9
I
Incapacitated subject
I
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
I
Informed consent
I
Inspection
I
Institutional Review Board (IRB)
I
Interactive response technology (IRT)
I
Interactive web response system (IWRS)
I
International data transfer
I
Investigational Medicinal Product Dossier (IMPD)
I
Investigational medicinal product (IMP)
I
Investigational New Drug (IND) application
I
Investigator
I
Investigator's brochure (IB)
I
In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR)
I
ISO/IEC 27001 (information security management)
I
ISO/IEC 42001 (AI management system)
J
Joint controllers
K
k-anonymity
K
Key-coded data (coded data)
K
Key (cryptographic key and pseudonymisation key)
K
Kinetics (pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics)
L
Large language model (LLM)
L
Lawfulness
L
Legal basis for processing
L
Legally designated representative
L
Legitimate interest
L
Legitimate interest assessment (LIA)
L
Local site investigator
M
Main establishment
M
Medical Device Regulation (MDR)
N
Natural history study
N
NIS2 Directive
N
Notified body
O
Observational study
O
Observer-reported outcome (ObsRO)
O
One-stop-shop mechanism and lead supervisory authority
O
Orphan drug designation (ODD)
P
Patient-reported outcome (PRO)
P
Performance outcome (PerfO)
P
Personal data
P
Personal data breach
P
Pharmacokinetics (PK)
P
Pharmacovigilance
P
Population pharmacokinetics (pop PK)
P
Principal investigator (PI)
P
Principles of data protection
P
Privacy
P
Privacy by design
P
Privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs)
P
Privacy notice (information notice)
P
Processing
P
Processor
P
Profiling
P
Protected health information (PHI)
Click a letter to view all its definitions
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Term of the Day

Natural history study

A natural history study is a preplanned observational study intended to track the course of a disease over time, identifying demographic, genetic, environmental and other variables that correlate with its development and outcomes in the absence of intervention, or under standard of care. Designs may be retrospective (chart review of existing records) or prospective (longitudinal follow-up of a cohort or registry).

Natural history data is particularly important in rare and paediatric diseases, where randomised placebo-controlled trials may be infeasible or unethical. The FDA (guidance on rare disease natural history studies, 2019) and the EMA accept well-designed natural history studies to define endpoints and biomarkers, identify patient subgroups, estimate sample sizes and, in some cases, serve as external or historical control arms for single-arm trials supporting orphan products.

Because they are non-interventional, natural history studies fall outside the CTR and are governed by national law (for example France's MR-003 or MR-004 reference methodologies) and by the GDPR. They typically involve secondary use of medical records, long-term follow-up, genetic data and small populations in which anonymisation is rarely achievable, so pseudonymisation, a DPIA and a robust research legal basis under Art. 9(2)(j) are essential. Registries maintained by patient organisations or academic consortia raise additional questions of joint controllership and data access governance.

R

Imported item 14

Regulatory intelligence is the structured practice of monitoring regulatory developments, evaluating their relevance and translating them into decisions. In life sciences, it connects new rules, guidance and authority communications to specific studies, products and data-processing activities. Its useful output is an assessed impact and action, not simply a collection of news links.

Key takeaways

  • Regulatory intelligence distinguishes binding rules from draft proposals and guidance, preventing teams from treating every announcement as an immediate obligation.
  • A useful regulatory assessment identifies the affected product, study, country or data flow before assigning an implementation owner and deadline.
  • Primary-source verification is essential when a secondary summary omits qualifications, transitional arrangements or the difference between adoption and application dates.

From Monitoring to Action

StepUseful output
CollectPrimary source and publication date
AssessScope, status and operational impact
AssignOwner, action and review point
VerifyEvidence of implementation or reason for no action

For example, FDA explains that guidance generally describes its current thinking rather than creating binding responsibilities. Its rulemaking overview distinguishes proposed and final rules. That distinction should survive every internal summary and slide deck.

Our operational approach is to record what changed, what did not change and why the change matters to the organisation. Keep the original source alongside the analysis so later reviewers can reconstruct the decision.

Why It Matters for Data Protection

We recommend linking relevant developments to the processing inventory, vendor register, study documentation and governance policies. A new requirement may affect a narrow data flow rather than the whole organisation; conversely, a single vendor change may affect several studies.

For example, consider a hypothetical sponsor reviewing new guidance on research technology. The useful question is which live systems and contracts need review, not how many newsletters mention the topic. Record an owner and a justified review date rather than issuing an undifferentiated alert.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is regulatory intelligence just legal news?

No. It adds relevance assessment and a decision about operational follow-up.

Should every update trigger a policy change?

No. Document scope and impact before deciding whether action is needed.

Can an AI summary replace source review?

We recommend checking the primary text, particularly for obligations, exceptions, dates and quotations.

Related: iliomad newsletters; regulations and guidelines; global data governance support.

Updated: 27 October 2026