Category: Preparing for First-In-Human Studies

Offers insights and best practices for Medtech, Biopharma, and Radiopharma companies preparing for their first-in-human clinical trials.

  • Intrials Brazil CRO vs a First-in-Human Device CRO (bioaccess®)

    If you typed Intrials into a search box, you are probably building a CRO shortlist. This article uses only what Intrials publishes (intrials.com.br) and compares it with bioaccess®, the First-in-Human CRO for medical devices in Latin America since 2010. It is a practitioner comparison, not a teardown.

    What Intrials publishes

    Intrials is a São Paulo CRO founded in 1999, operating in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru. It runs Phase I–IV with core areas in oncology, infectious disease and vaccines, rare disease, immunology, cardiology, dermatology and respiratory, and a Medidata partner listing includes devices and diagnostics. Sergio Braga Filho is President and CEO. We found no named device first-in-human study.

    Intrials vs bioaccess®

    Dimension Intrials bioaccess®
    Core focus Homegrown full-service LATAM CRO, drug-primary First-in-human and early feasibility studies for medical devices
    Geography Latin America (its homepage cites 25+ years in the region and 550+ studies) Latin America, since 2010
    Device FIH track record No named device first-in-human study found on the public pages reviewed Published case studies on bioaccessla.com
    After the trial See provider site Live multi-country sanitary registration and in-country holder service

    Where each one fits

    If the program is a multi-country Phase II–III drug or late-phase study across South America and Mexico, Intrials is a strong homegrown option.

    If the job is a first-in-human or early feasibility study for a medical device, bioaccess® is a specialist built for exactly that, running device studies in Latin America since 2010. When the study ends, the same company can register and hold the device across the region through its market access service. Ask any CRO on your list, including Intrials, for a named or de-identified device first-in-human study: device class, implant or not, number of patients, ISO 14155 monitoring plan and how the data was used in an FDA file.

    Other Latin American CROs are compared in the guide to first-in-human device CROs in Latin America and on the bioaccess® compare hub.

    Ready to compare a proposal? Request a first-in-human study proposal.

    Competitor facts from the Intrials public pages linked above and public announcements, reviewed for bioaccess® competitive research (Aug 2026–Nov 2026). Claims are theirs. No invented sponsors, prices or contacts.

  • Elemental / CORVIA CRO Mexico vs a First-in-Human Device CRO (bioaccess®)

    If you typed CORVIA CRO / Elemental consortium into a search box, you are probably building a CRO shortlist. This article uses only what CORVIA CRO / Elemental consortium publishes (elemental.org.mx/cro · elemental.org.mx/consorcio) and compares it with bioaccess®, the First-in-Human CRO for medical devices in Latin America since 2010. It is a practitioner comparison, not a teardown.

    What CORVIA CRO / Elemental consortium publishes

    Elemental is a Mexican consortium whose CRO page offers services for pharmaceuticals, biotech products, supplements and medical devices. Its consortium sites include CECyPE in Morelia, IDEAS / IDeCSa in Mexico City, CIMET in Guadalajara and FScientia in San Luis Potosí. It also lists prototype development and medical-device protocol design. We found no named device first-in-human study.

    CORVIA CRO / Elemental consortium vs bioaccess®

    Dimension CORVIA CRO / Elemental consortium bioaccess®
    Core focus Mexican site consortium + CRO across product classes First-in-human and early feasibility studies for medical devices
    Geography Mexico (CRO based in Mexico) Latin America, since 2010
    Device FIH track record No named device first-in-human study found on the public pages reviewed Published case studies on bioaccessla.com
    After the trial Regulatory advice (COFEPRIS, ANVISA, FDA, NMPA), pharmacovigilance and Phase IV / real-world studies Live multi-country sanitary registration and in-country holder service

    Where each one fits

    If you want Mexican site capacity across several cities and a group that also helps with prototype development, Elemental is worth a call.

    If the job is a first-in-human or early feasibility study for a medical device, bioaccess® is a specialist built for exactly that, running device studies in Latin America since 2010. When the study ends, the same company can register and hold the device across the region through its market access service. Ask any CRO on your list, including CORVIA CRO / Elemental consortium, for a named or de-identified device first-in-human study: device class, implant or not, number of patients, ISO 14155 monitoring plan and how the data was used in an FDA file.

    Other Latin American CROs are compared in the guide to first-in-human device CROs in Latin America and on the bioaccess® compare hub.

    Ready to compare a proposal? Request a first-in-human study proposal.

    Competitor facts from the CORVIA CRO / Elemental consortium public pages linked above and public announcements, reviewed for bioaccess® competitive research (Aug 2026–Nov 2026). Claims are theirs. No invented sponsors, prices or contacts.

  • Infinite Clinical Research Mexico vs a First-in-Human Device CRO (bioaccess®)

    If you typed Infinite Clinical Research (WEAREINFINITE) into a search box, you are probably building a CRO shortlist. This article uses only what Infinite Clinical Research (WEAREINFINITE) publishes (weareinfinite.mx) and compares it with bioaccess®, the First-in-Human CRO for medical devices in Latin America since 2010. It is a practitioner comparison, not a teardown.

    What Infinite Clinical Research (WEAREINFINITE) publishes

    Infinite Clinical Research (WEAREINFINITE) is a Mexico City CRO that calls itself "100% Mexican" and full-service, and is a founding member of ACROM. It publishes a research protocols and medical devices service, COFEPRIS device registrations and technovigilance. We found no named device protocol or sponsor on its site.

    Infinite Clinical Research (WEAREINFINITE) vs bioaccess®

    Dimension Infinite Clinical Research (WEAREINFINITE) bioaccess®
    Core focus Mexico full-service CRO with device protocols and COFEPRIS First-in-human and early feasibility studies for medical devices
    Geography Mexico City HQ; lists operations in Mexico, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Panama, Dominican Republic and El Salvador, among others Latin America, since 2010
    Device FIH track record No named device first-in-human study found on the public pages reviewed Published case studies on bioaccessla.com
    After the trial COFEPRIS sanitary registration for medicines and devices, import logistics, pharmacovigilance and technovigilance Live multi-country sanitary registration and in-country holder service

    Where each one fits

    If Mexico is the only country and you want one local firm for the protocol and the COFEPRIS registration, Infinite publishes both.

    If the job is a first-in-human or early feasibility study for a medical device, bioaccess® is a specialist built for exactly that, running device studies in Latin America since 2010. When the study ends, the same company can register and hold the device across the region through its market access service. Ask any CRO on your list, including Infinite Clinical Research (WEAREINFINITE), for a named or de-identified device first-in-human study: device class, implant or not, number of patients, ISO 14155 monitoring plan and how the data was used in an FDA file.

    Other Latin American CROs are compared in the guide to first-in-human device CROs in Latin America and on the bioaccess® compare hub.

    Ready to compare a proposal? Request a first-in-human study proposal.

    Competitor facts from the Infinite Clinical Research (WEAREINFINITE) public pages linked above and public announcements, reviewed for bioaccess® competitive research (Aug 2026–Nov 2026). Claims are theirs. No invented sponsors, prices or contacts.

  • MSC MED Brazil Device CRO vs a First-in-Human CRO for Latin America (bioaccess®)

    If you typed MSC MED into a search box, you are probably building a CRO shortlist. This article uses only what MSC MED publishes (www.mscmed.com.br/en) and compares it with bioaccess®, the First-in-Human CRO for medical devices in Latin America since 2010. It is a practitioner comparison, not a teardown.

    What MSC MED publishes

    MSC MED (MSc Med Engenharia e Tecnologia Médica Ltda.) is a Brazilian CRO headquartered in Florianópolis with a commercial office in Curitiba. It describes itself as a CRO specializing in safety and efficacy demonstration and international regulation of medical devices. Services include clinical evaluation (ISO / ANVISA), biocompatibility, MRI compatibility and registration hosting. Heitor Korndorfer is founder and CEO.

    MSC MED vs bioaccess®

    Dimension MSC MED bioaccess®
    Core focus Device clinical evaluation, testing and Brazil regulatory First-in-human and early feasibility studies for medical devices
    Geography Brazil (Florianópolis HQ, Curitiba office); says it has served companies from over 15 countries Latin America, since 2010
    Device FIH track record No named device first-in-human study found on the public pages reviewed Published case studies on bioaccessla.com
    After the trial Brazil registration hosting and ANVISA / FDA regulatory support Live multi-country sanitary registration and in-country holder service

    Where each one fits

    If the job is clinical evaluation, biocompatibility or MRI-compatibility work, or a Brazil registration, MSC MED is built for it.

    If the job is a first-in-human or early feasibility study for a medical device, bioaccess® is a specialist built for exactly that, running device studies in Latin America since 2010. When the study ends, the same company can register and hold the device across the region through its market access service. Ask any CRO on your list, including MSC MED, for a named or de-identified device first-in-human study: device class, implant or not, number of patients, ISO 14155 monitoring plan and how the data was used in an FDA file.

    Other Latin American CROs are compared in the guide to first-in-human device CROs in Latin America and on the bioaccess® compare hub.

    Ready to compare a proposal? Request a first-in-human study proposal.

    Competitor facts from the MSC MED public pages linked above and public announcements, reviewed for bioaccess® competitive research (Aug 2026–Nov 2026). Claims are theirs. No invented sponsors, prices or contacts.

  • Zenter Research Argentina vs a First-in-Human Device CRO (bioaccess®)

    If you typed Zenter Research into a search box, you are probably building a CRO shortlist. This article uses only what Zenter Research publishes (zenterresearch.com) and compares it with bioaccess®, the First-in-Human CRO for medical devices in Latin America since 2010. It is a practitioner comparison, not a teardown.

    What Zenter Research publishes

    Zenter Research S.A. is an Argentine CRO in the San Isidro / Buenos Aires area, founded by Victor Molina Viamonte, MD FACC, its CEO and CSO. Its public materials describe cardiovascular "Pharmaceutical & Devices" work, clinical and medical monitoring of pharmaceutical and device trials, and "First Time in Man" Phase I studies, with FDA audits it cites in 2014 and 2019. The device work it describes is cardiovascular Phase II–III megatrials, not a named early feasibility study.

    Zenter Research vs bioaccess®

    Dimension Zenter Research bioaccess®
    Core focus Drug-primary cardiovascular CRO with device monitoring and Phase I First-in-human and early feasibility studies for medical devices
    Geography Argentina; offers legal representation before ANMAT for sponsors outside Argentina Latin America, since 2010
    Device FIH track record No named device first-in-human study found on the public pages reviewed Published case studies on bioaccessla.com
    After the trial See provider site Live multi-country sanitary registration and in-country holder service

    Where each one fits

    If the program is a cardiovascular drug or a large Phase II–III device trial centered in Argentina, Zenter is a credible local option.

    If the job is a first-in-human or early feasibility study for a medical device, bioaccess® is a specialist built for exactly that, running device studies in Latin America since 2010. When the study ends, the same company can register and hold the device across the region through its market access service. Ask any CRO on your list, including Zenter Research, for a named or de-identified device first-in-human study: device class, implant or not, number of patients, ISO 14155 monitoring plan and how the data was used in an FDA file.

    Other Latin American CROs are compared in the guide to first-in-human device CROs in Latin America and on the bioaccess® compare hub.

    Ready to compare a proposal? Request a first-in-human study proposal.

    Competitor facts from the Zenter Research public pages linked above and public announcements, reviewed for bioaccess® competitive research (Aug 2026–Nov 2026). Claims are theirs. No invented sponsors, prices or contacts.

  • Dr. Carlos Rojas, Bradford Hill: A Chile FIH Principal Investigator Is Not the CRO

    If you searched Dr. Carlos Rojas Bradford Hill, Carlos Rojas first-in-human Chile, or Sona THT principal investigator, you found a real investigator in the public record. Dr. Carlos Rojas is named by Sona Nanotech as the principal investigator of its first-in-human Targeted Hyperthermia Therapy study and as executive director of Bradford Hill in Santiago, Chile. A principal investigator is not the CRO.

    bioaccess®’s position is simple and it is not adversarial: the investigator and the site run the cases. The First-in-Human CRO still owns ISP authorization, Law 20.120 Ethical-Scientific Committee review, investigational import, insurance, ISO 14155 monitoring, and the FDA 21 CFR 812.28 package. Emailing the PI is a good way to test investigator interest. It is not a regulatory plan.

    What the public record says

    • Sona Nanotech, 16 June 2025: clinical trial agreement with Bradford Hill Investigación Clínica, Santiago, for an early feasibility study of THT in up to ten advanced melanoma patients; Dr. Carlos Rojas named principal investigator and Bradford Hill executive director.
    • Sona Nanotech, 20 October 2025: study completion; Dr. Rojas, quoted as executive director of the Bradford Hill Clinical Cancer Research Center, described rapid responses in patients who had exhausted standard immunotherapy.
    • ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06894407: industry sponsor Sona Nanotech Inc, DEVICE_FEASIBILITY, enrollment 10, single location Bradford Hill, Santiago, Chile; no CRO or collaborator listed; record updated 2 October 2026 to COMPLETED.

    The facility-level page is here: Bradford Hill, Santiago: the site is not the CRO.

    PI versus CRO

    Workstream Principal investigator First-in-Human CRO
    Clinical judgment and cases Yes Supports with protocol training and monitoring
    ISP file and amendments Signs what the site must sign Prepares, submits, and answers deficiencies
    Device import No Importer of record for the investigational device
    ISO 14155 monitoring and TMF Keeps source documents Monitors, reconciles, and closes out
    FDA 21 CFR 812.28 Provides site data Builds the foreign-data narrative for the U.S. submission

    FAQ

    Did bioaccess® work on Dr. Rojas’s Sona study?
    No. This page reports public sources only and claims no role in that study.

    Does bioaccess® only work in Chile?
    No. bioaccess® is the First-in-Human CRO for medical devices in Latin America since 2010, and it still runs clinical trials in Colombia as well as Chile, Panama, and the rest of the platform.

    Sources: Sona Nanotech press releases of 16 June 2025 and 20 October 2025; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06894407. Public sources only.

  • Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba (UNIMEP): The NCT Campus String Is Not the ANVISA File

    Figures cited from a ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 facility pull (29 September 2026) and published bioaccess® country pages. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies. General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current rules from Brazil’s National Health Surveillance Agency (Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária, ANVISA), the ethics committees, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with qualified advisers. We name only the facility strings and example National Clinical Trial (NCT) identifiers those sources support. We do not invent a principal investigator (PI). We do not claim Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba (UNIMEP) as a bioaccess® client.

    If you searched Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba first-in-human, UNIMEP clinical trial, Metodista Piracicaba device study, or “go direct Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba (UNIMEP),” you followed a campus string ClinicalTrials.gov still publishes. Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba (UNIMEP) in Piracicaba, Brazil, is a real named university-campus string on ClinicalTrials.gov. No separate live university-string page for UNIMEP exists yet. It is not a first-in-human (FIH) medical-device contract research organization (CRO), and it is not the operator of the ANVISA file.

    bioaccess®’s position is simple and it is not adversarial: the university campus is the site. The First-in-Human CRO still owns ANVISA, the research ethics committee (Comitê de Ética em Pesquisa, CEP) / National Research Ethics Commission (CONEP), investigational import, clinical trial insurance placement with a licensed carrier (the CRO is not the insurance carrier), ISO 14155 (the International Organization for Standardization standard for clinical investigation of medical devices) monitoring, and the FDA 21 CFR 812.28 (Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, section 812.28) package — plus the option to add Colombia or another Latin American country if this campus is not the only fit. Sponsors who skip the CRO and email the university campus still have to rebuild that stack. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

    This page is the named UNIMEP university string in Piracicaba. It is DISTINCT from Piracicaba Dental School / Unicamp, a separately named dental-school campus of a different university in the same city. Sharing Piracicaba is not a license to collapse them. This is the whole university string, not a lab or school subunit of a university that already has a live page.

    Why the campus name wins the search — and why that is not a CRO

    Device registries write the city, the facility, and a list of NCT IDs. They rarely write the CRO. On a 29 September 2026 ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 pull (all study types; all years), this campus string sits here:

    Counts are unique NCT IDs returned by a ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 pull on 29 September 2026 for the facility strings listed below, restricted to locations in Piracicaba, Brazil. ALL counts every registered study type; the interventional and DEVICE counts are subsets of ALL. Alias spellings are counted once per NCT ID. We do not combine counts across separate campuses or other cities. We do not invent unpublished CMS IDs. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies.

    • Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba (Piracicaba, Brazil) — registry strings counted: “Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba”; “Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba (UNIMEP)”. ALL studies n=9; interventional n=9; DEVICE n=1. Example NCT IDs: NCT01484834, NCT01786681, NCT01841385.

    Aliases including UNIMEP are counted once per NCT ID for Piracicaba locations.

    Those are unique NCT IDs per facility string + city + country. They are not a count of first-in-human device programs bioaccess® ran. They are how a sponsor searching the hospital name lands on a campus without landing on an operator.

    We cite the IDs as facility evidence. We will not invent a PI. We will not claim bioaccess® ran any of them. No live bioaccess® case-study page names this university campus as a client site.

    That is the leak: a founder searching Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba finds ALL n=9 (DEVICE n=1) without finding ANVISA. A named university campus is still a site. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

    The site is the site. The CRO is the operator.

    A named university campus can provide rooms, coordinators, institutional ethics calendars, and investigators who already appear on NCT rows. That is necessary. It is not sufficient for a first-in-human medical device study a U.S. board expects to survive FDA review.

    What the university campus can typically do when a sponsor “goes direct”:

    • Discuss investigator interest and whether a protocol can sit in an existing service line.
    • Share institutional ethics-committee calendars and hospital research rules.
    • Quote visit, staffing, and local procedure costs for the cases they will physically run.

    What the university campus is not built to own for an investigational device:

    • ANVISA. Device investigations sit under ANVISA Collegiate Board Resolution (RDC) 837/2023 (dossier in Portuguese: investigator’s brochure (IB), protocol, informed consent form (ICF), insurance, good manufacturing practice (GMP) evidence). A hallway conversation at this campus is not that dossier. A hallway conversation at UNIMEP is not a Piracicaba Dental School / Unicamp file and is not an ANVISA file.
    • Investigational import. Ethics letter, investigator’s brochure, and an importation permit — end-to-end work, not a PI email. See importer of record for clinical trial devices in Latin America.
    • Clinical trial insurance. Required. The CRO coordinates the policy with a licensed insurer; the CRO is not the insurance carrier. We will not invent a campus-only premium or rate here.
    • ISO 14155 monitoring, electronic data capture (EDC), serious adverse event (SAE) reporting, and the trial master file (TMF). The site may run visits. The CRO runs the quality system the FDA will later ask about.
    • The 21 CFR 812.28 package. Foreign data is eligible for FDA submission and review after good clinical practice (GCP) / ethics documentation. Eligibility is not clearance, and a site master services agreement (MSA) does not produce it.
    • Multi-country optionality. If enrollment or the indication later needs another Latin American country, a single-hospital MSA will not stretch.

    Going direct to this campus is how you confirm a room. It is not how you open an investigational file.

    How ANVISA actually works (the short version)

    Use Clinical Trials in Brazil: combined ethics + ANVISA typically 6–10 weeks under Law 14874 and RDC 837/2023; CEPs capped at 30 business days; published per-patient range $20,000–$35,000. Trial authorization and later market registration are separate workstreams.

    Ask for a protocol-specific calendar. A hospital email is not ANVISA clearance. bioaccess® manages the file. That is CRO work, not site work.

    All bioaccess® device protocols in this country are run under ISO 14155 and the Declaration of Helsinki. Data is designed to be eligible for FDA submission and review under 21 CFR 812.28 on a case-by-case basis — not a guarantee of clearance or approval. See outside-the-United-States (OUS) FIH data and the FDA Investigational Device Exemption (IDE).

    Not a critique of the university

    Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba is a serious named Brazilian university campus on the public registry. ALL n=9 and DEVICE n=1 are registry volume, not a punchline. Use the site when the protocol fits. Hire the operator.

    What the CRO still does after you have the campus on a slide

    1. Regulatory-fit, not tourism. This geography is sourced. One campus is not automatically the right room for every indication. bioaccess® still runs trials in Colombia and the rest of the platform.
    2. Protocol, IB, ICF, insurance, and the ANVISA / ethics packet.
    3. Importer of record and device accountability.
    4. Site activation that is more than a tour: contracts, training, investigational product, EDC, monitoring plan. Activate this campus only if it fits the protocol.
    5. ISO 14155 monitoring and the 21 CFR 812.28 narrative so the dataset is built for a later Pre-Submission (Pre-Sub), IDE, 510(k) premarket notification, De Novo request, premarket approval (PMA), or humanitarian device exemption (HDE) — eligibility, not a promise of FDA action.

    The firm was founded in 2010. That is the operator layer around a campus string.

    Colombia is still on the map

    Public line: bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now — local entity, Miami headquarters, own CRO in Colombia. Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. INVIMA commercial registration remains. In Panama and Colombia alike, ethics timing depends on each committee’s meeting schedule. The country page’s published per-patient comparison: $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K as published on Clinical Trials in Panama. We pick the country the device needs. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

    Frequently asked questions

    Can I contract Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba (UNIMEP) directly for a device FIH?

    You can try. The university campus can discuss investigator interest, local visit costs, and ethics calendars. It cannot, by ranking on ClinicalTrials.gov, become your ANVISA applicant, importer of record, insurance coordinator, ISO 14155 monitor, or 21 CFR 812.28 packager. Contract the CRO, then let the CRO activate the site if the site fits.

    Did bioaccess® run the NCT IDs listed here?

    No public bioaccess® case-study page names this university campus. We will not invent that claim. This page answers the search; it does not claim the studies.

    Is this the same page as Piracicaba Dental School (Unicamp)?

    No. Piracicaba Dental School (Unicamp) is a distinct Unicamp dental-school campus already published. This page is the UNIMEP university string only.

    Did bioaccess® run NCT01484834?

    No. We cite it as facility evidence. We will not invent a sponsor or a PI.

    Next step

    If the search that brought you here was this campus, start as the operator: contact bioaccess® or book from First-in-Human CRO. Piracicaba sibling (do not merge): Piracicaba Dental School.

    Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®

  • Centro Paulista de Oncologia São Paulo: The NCT Campus String Is Not the ANVISA File

    Figures cited from a ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 facility pull (29 September 2026) and published bioaccess® country pages. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies. General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current rules from Brazil’s National Health Surveillance Agency (Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária, ANVISA), the ethics committees, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with qualified advisers. We name only the facility strings and example National Clinical Trial (NCT) identifiers those sources support. We do not invent a principal investigator (PI). We do not claim Centro Paulista de Oncologia São Paulo as a bioaccess® client.

    If you searched Centro Paulista de Oncologia Sao Paulo first-in-human, Centro Paulista de Oncologia clinical trial, CPO Sao Paulo device study, or “go direct Centro Paulista de Oncologia São Paulo,” you followed a campus string ClinicalTrials.gov still publishes. Centro Paulista de Oncologia in São Paulo, Brazil, is a real named clinic-campus string on ClinicalTrials.gov. It is not a first-in-human (FIH) medical-device contract research organization (CRO), and it is not the operator of the ANVISA file.

    bioaccess®’s position is simple and it is not adversarial: the clinic is the site. The First-in-Human CRO still owns ANVISA, the research ethics committee (Comitê de Ética em Pesquisa, CEP) / National Research Ethics Commission (CONEP), investigational import, clinical trial insurance placement with a licensed carrier (the CRO is not the insurance carrier), ISO 14155 (the International Organization for Standardization standard for clinical investigation of medical devices) monitoring, and the FDA 21 CFR 812.28 (Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, section 812.28) package — plus the option to add Colombia or another Latin American country if this campus is not the only fit. Sponsors who skip the CRO and email the clinic still have to rebuild that stack. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

    This page is the named São Paulo Centro Paulista de Oncologia campus. It is DISTINCT from Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo, Oncoclínicas Rio de Janeiro, Núcleo de Oncologia da Bahia Salvador, and other oncology strings. Sharing São Paulo or Oncologia is not a license to collapse them.

    Why the campus name wins the search — and why that is not a CRO

    Device registries write the city, the facility, and a list of NCT IDs. They rarely write the CRO. On a 29 September 2026 ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 pull (all study types; all years), this campus string sits here:

    Counts are unique NCT IDs returned by a ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 pull on 29 September 2026 for the facility strings listed below, restricted to locations in São Paulo, Brazil. ALL counts every registered study type; the interventional and DEVICE counts are subsets of ALL. Alias spellings are counted once per NCT ID. We do not combine counts across separate campuses or other cities. We do not invent unpublished CMS IDs. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies.

    • Centro Paulista de Oncologia (São Paulo, Brazil) — registry strings counted: “Centro Paulista de Oncologia”. ALL studies n=9; interventional n=4; DEVICE n=1. Example NCT IDs: NCT01478269, NCT03151629, NCT03942497.

    Counted once per NCT ID for São Paulo locations; 5 of the 9 are observational.

    Those are unique NCT IDs per facility string + city + country. They are not a count of first-in-human device programs bioaccess® ran. They are how a sponsor searching the hospital name lands on a campus without landing on an operator.

    We cite the IDs as facility evidence. We will not invent a PI. We will not claim bioaccess® ran any of them. No live bioaccess® case-study page names this clinic as a client site.

    That is the leak: a founder searching Centro Paulista de Oncologia in São Paulo finds ALL n=9 (DEVICE n=1) without finding ANVISA. A named clinic campus is still a site. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

    The site is the site. The CRO is the operator.

    A named clinic can provide rooms, coordinators, institutional ethics calendars, and investigators who already appear on NCT rows. That is necessary. It is not sufficient for a first-in-human medical device study a U.S. board expects to survive FDA review.

    What the clinic can typically do when a sponsor “goes direct”:

    • Discuss investigator interest and whether a protocol can sit in an existing service line.
    • Share institutional ethics-committee calendars and hospital research rules.
    • Quote visit, staffing, and local procedure costs for the cases they will physically run.

    What the clinic is not built to own for an investigational device:

    • ANVISA. Device investigations sit under ANVISA Collegiate Board Resolution (RDC) 837/2023 (dossier in Portuguese: investigator’s brochure (IB), protocol, informed consent form (ICF), insurance, good manufacturing practice (GMP) evidence). A hallway conversation at this campus is not that dossier. A hallway conversation at Centro Paulista de Oncologia is not a Beneficência Portuguesa file and is not an ANVISA file.
    • Investigational import. Ethics letter, investigator’s brochure, and an importation permit — end-to-end work, not a PI email. See importer of record for clinical trial devices in Latin America.
    • Clinical trial insurance. Required. The CRO coordinates the policy with a licensed insurer; the CRO is not the insurance carrier. We will not invent a campus-only premium or rate here.
    • ISO 14155 monitoring, electronic data capture (EDC), serious adverse event (SAE) reporting, and the trial master file (TMF). The site may run visits. The CRO runs the quality system the FDA will later ask about.
    • The 21 CFR 812.28 package. Foreign data is eligible for FDA submission and review after good clinical practice (GCP) / ethics documentation. Eligibility is not clearance, and a site master services agreement (MSA) does not produce it.
    • Multi-country optionality. If enrollment or the indication later needs another Latin American country, a single-hospital MSA will not stretch.

    Going direct to this campus is how you confirm a room. It is not how you open an investigational file.

    How ANVISA actually works (the short version)

    Use Clinical Trials in Brazil: combined ethics + ANVISA typically 6–10 weeks under Law 14874 and RDC 837/2023; CEPs capped at 30 business days; published per-patient range $20,000–$35,000. Trial authorization and later market registration are separate workstreams.

    Ask for a protocol-specific calendar. A hospital email is not ANVISA clearance. bioaccess® manages the file. That is CRO work, not site work.

    All bioaccess® device protocols in this country are run under ISO 14155 and the Declaration of Helsinki. Data is designed to be eligible for FDA submission and review under 21 CFR 812.28 on a case-by-case basis — not a guarantee of clearance or approval. See outside-the-United-States (OUS) FIH data and the FDA Investigational Device Exemption (IDE).

    Not a critique of the clinic

    Centro Paulista de Oncologia is a serious named São Paulo campus on the public registry. ALL n=9 and DEVICE n=1 are registry volume, not a punchline. Use the site when the protocol fits. Hire the operator.

    What the CRO still does after you have the campus on a slide

    1. Regulatory-fit, not tourism. This geography is sourced. One campus is not automatically the right room for every indication. bioaccess® still runs trials in Colombia and the rest of the platform.
    2. Protocol, IB, ICF, insurance, and the ANVISA / ethics packet.
    3. Importer of record and device accountability.
    4. Site activation that is more than a tour: contracts, training, investigational product, EDC, monitoring plan. Activate this campus only if it fits the protocol.
    5. ISO 14155 monitoring and the 21 CFR 812.28 narrative so the dataset is built for a later Pre-Submission (Pre-Sub), IDE, 510(k) premarket notification, De Novo request, premarket approval (PMA), or humanitarian device exemption (HDE) — eligibility, not a promise of FDA action.

    The firm was founded in 2010. That is the operator layer around a campus string.

    Colombia is still on the map

    Public line: bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now — local entity, Miami headquarters, own CRO in Colombia. Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. INVIMA commercial registration remains. Ethics timing in Panama and Colombia follows each committee’s meeting schedule. The country page’s published per-patient comparison: $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K as published on Clinical Trials in Panama. We pick the country the device needs. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

    Frequently asked questions

    Can I contract Centro Paulista de Oncologia São Paulo directly for a device FIH?

    You can try. The clinic can discuss investigator interest, local visit costs, and ethics calendars. It cannot, by ranking on ClinicalTrials.gov, become your ANVISA applicant, importer of record, insurance coordinator, ISO 14155 monitor, or 21 CFR 812.28 packager. Contract the CRO, then let the CRO activate the site if the site fits.

    Did bioaccess® run the NCT IDs listed here?

    No public bioaccess® case-study page names this clinic. We will not invent that claim. This page answers the search; it does not claim the studies.

    Is this the same page as Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo?

    No. Beneficência Portuguesa is a distinct São Paulo campus string. This page is Centro Paulista de Oncologia only.

    Did bioaccess® run NCT01478269?

    No. We cite it as facility evidence. We will not invent a sponsor or a PI.

    Next step

    If the search that brought you here was this campus, start as the operator: contact bioaccess® or book from First-in-Human CRO. São Paulo sibling (do not merge): Laboratory of Phototherapy São Paulo.

    Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®

  • Federal University of Juiz de Fora (UFJF): The NCT Campus String Is Not the ANVISA File

    Figures cited from a ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 facility pull (29 September 2026) and published bioaccess® country pages. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies. General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current rules from Brazil’s National Health Surveillance Agency (Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária, ANVISA), the ethics committees, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with qualified advisers. We name only the facility strings and example National Clinical Trial (NCT) identifiers those sources support. We do not invent a principal investigator (PI). We do not claim Federal University of Juiz de Fora (UFJF) as a bioaccess® client.

    If you searched Federal University of Juiz de Fora first-in-human, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora clinical trial, UFJF device study, or “go direct Federal University of Juiz de Fora (UFJF),” you followed a campus string ClinicalTrials.gov still publishes. Federal University of Juiz de Fora (Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, UFJF) in Juiz de Fora, Brazil, is a real named university-campus string on ClinicalTrials.gov. No separate live university-string page for UFJF exists yet. It is not a first-in-human (FIH) medical-device contract research organization (CRO), and it is not the operator of the ANVISA file.

    bioaccess®’s position is simple and it is not adversarial: the university campus is the site. The First-in-Human CRO still owns ANVISA, the research ethics committee (Comitê de Ética em Pesquisa, CEP) / National Research Ethics Commission (CONEP), investigational import, clinical trial insurance placement with a licensed carrier (the CRO is not the insurance carrier), ISO 14155 (the International Organization for Standardization standard for clinical investigation of medical devices) monitoring, and the FDA 21 CFR 812.28 (Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, section 812.28) package — plus the option to add Colombia or another Latin American country if this campus is not the only fit. Sponsors who skip the CRO and email the university campus still have to rebuild that stack. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

    This page is the named UFJF university string. It is DISTINCT from CMiP Juiz de Fora, a separately named clinic campus in the same city. Sharing Juiz de Fora is not a license to collapse them. This is the whole university string, not a lab or school subunit of a university that already has a live page.

    Why the campus name wins the search — and why that is not a CRO

    Device registries write the city, the facility, and a list of NCT IDs. They rarely write the CRO. On a 29 September 2026 ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 pull (all study types; all years), this campus string sits here:

    Counts are unique NCT IDs returned by a ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 pull on 29 September 2026 for the facility strings listed below, restricted to locations in Juiz de Fora, Brazil. ALL counts every registered study type; the interventional and DEVICE counts are subsets of ALL. Alias spellings are counted once per NCT ID. We do not combine counts across separate campuses or other cities. We do not invent unpublished CMS IDs. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies.

    • Federal University of Juiz de Fora (Juiz de Fora, Brazil) — registry strings counted: “Federal University of Juiz de Fora”; “Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora”; “federal University of Juiz de Fora”. ALL studies n=10; interventional n=10; DEVICE n=1. Example NCT IDs: NCT00545103, NCT00943475, NCT01544439.

    Aliases (Federal University of Juiz de Fora; Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora) are counted once per NCT ID for Juiz de Fora locations.

    Those are unique NCT IDs per facility string + city + country. They are not a count of first-in-human device programs bioaccess® ran. They are how a sponsor searching the hospital name lands on a campus without landing on an operator.

    We cite the IDs as facility evidence. We will not invent a PI. We will not claim bioaccess® ran any of them. No live bioaccess® case-study page names this university campus as a client site.

    That is the leak: a founder searching Federal University of Juiz de Fora finds ALL n=10 (DEVICE n=1) without finding ANVISA. A named university campus is still a site. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

    The site is the site. The CRO is the operator.

    A named university campus can provide rooms, coordinators, institutional ethics calendars, and investigators who already appear on NCT rows. That is necessary. It is not sufficient for a first-in-human medical device study a U.S. board expects to survive FDA review.

    What the university campus can typically do when a sponsor “goes direct”:

    • Discuss investigator interest and whether a protocol can sit in an existing service line.
    • Share institutional ethics-committee calendars and hospital research rules.
    • Quote visit, staffing, and local procedure costs for the cases they will physically run.

    What the university campus is not built to own for an investigational device:

    • ANVISA. Device investigations sit under ANVISA Collegiate Board Resolution (RDC) 837/2023 (dossier in Portuguese: investigator’s brochure (IB), protocol, informed consent form (ICF), insurance, good manufacturing practice (GMP) evidence). A hallway conversation at this campus is not that dossier. A hallway conversation at UFJF is not a CMiP file and is not an ANVISA file.
    • Investigational import. Ethics letter, investigator’s brochure, and an importation permit — end-to-end work, not a PI email. See importer of record for clinical trial devices in Latin America.
    • Clinical trial insurance. Required. The CRO coordinates the policy with a licensed insurer; the CRO is not the insurance carrier. We will not invent a campus-only premium or rate here.
    • ISO 14155 monitoring, electronic data capture (EDC), serious adverse event (SAE) reporting, and the trial master file (TMF). The site may run visits. The CRO runs the quality system the FDA will later ask about.
    • The 21 CFR 812.28 package. Foreign data is eligible for FDA submission and review after good clinical practice (GCP) / ethics documentation. Eligibility is not clearance, and a site master services agreement (MSA) does not produce it.
    • Multi-country optionality. If enrollment or the indication later needs another Latin American country, a single-hospital MSA will not stretch.

    Going direct to this campus is how you confirm a room. It is not how you open an investigational file.

    How ANVISA actually works (the short version)

    Use Clinical Trials in Brazil: combined ethics + ANVISA typically 6–10 weeks under Law 14874 and RDC 837/2023; CEPs capped at 30 business days; published per-patient range $20,000–$35,000. Trial authorization and later market registration are separate workstreams.

    Ask for a protocol-specific calendar. A hospital email is not ANVISA clearance. bioaccess® manages the file. That is CRO work, not site work.

    All bioaccess® device protocols in this country are run under ISO 14155 and the Declaration of Helsinki. Data is designed to be eligible for FDA submission and review under 21 CFR 812.28 on a case-by-case basis — not a guarantee of clearance or approval. See outside-the-United-States (OUS) FIH data and the FDA Investigational Device Exemption (IDE).

    Not a critique of the university

    Federal University of Juiz de Fora is a serious named Brazilian university campus on the public registry. ALL n=10 and DEVICE n=1 are registry volume, not a punchline. Use the site when the protocol fits. Hire the operator.

    What the CRO still does after you have the campus on a slide

    1. Regulatory-fit, not tourism. This geography is sourced. One campus is not automatically the right room for every indication. bioaccess® still runs trials in Colombia and the rest of the platform.
    2. Protocol, IB, ICF, insurance, and the ANVISA / ethics packet.
    3. Importer of record and device accountability.
    4. Site activation that is more than a tour: contracts, training, investigational product, EDC, monitoring plan. Activate this campus only if it fits the protocol.
    5. ISO 14155 monitoring and the 21 CFR 812.28 narrative so the dataset is built for a later Pre-Submission (Pre-Sub), IDE, 510(k) premarket notification, De Novo request, premarket approval (PMA), or humanitarian device exemption (HDE) — eligibility, not a promise of FDA action.

    The firm was founded in 2010. That is the operator layer around a campus string.

    Colombia is still on the map

    Public line: bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now — local entity, Miami headquarters, own CRO in Colombia. Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. INVIMA commercial registration remains. In Panama and Colombia alike, ethics timing depends on each committee’s meeting schedule. The country page’s published per-patient comparison: $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K as published on Clinical Trials in Panama. We pick the country the device needs. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

    Frequently asked questions

    Can I contract Federal University of Juiz de Fora (UFJF) directly for a device FIH?

    You can try. The university campus can discuss investigator interest, local visit costs, and ethics calendars. It cannot, by ranking on ClinicalTrials.gov, become your ANVISA applicant, importer of record, insurance coordinator, ISO 14155 monitor, or 21 CFR 812.28 packager. Contract the CRO, then let the CRO activate the site if the site fits.

    Did bioaccess® run the NCT IDs listed here?

    No public bioaccess® case-study page names this university campus. We will not invent that claim. This page answers the search; it does not claim the studies.

    Is this the same page as CMiP Juiz de Fora?

    No. CMiP Juiz de Fora is a distinct clinic campus already published. This page is the UFJF university string only.

    Did bioaccess® run NCT00545103?

    No. We cite it as facility evidence. We will not invent a sponsor or a PI.

    Next step

    If the search that brought you here was this campus, start as the operator: contact bioaccess® or book from First-in-Human CRO. Juiz de Fora sibling (do not merge): CMiP Juiz de Fora.

    Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®

  • Hospital Churruca (Churruca-Visca) Buenos Aires: The NCT Campus String Is Not the ANMAT File

    Figures cited from a ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 facility pull (29 September 2026) and published bioaccess® country pages. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies. General information, not legal or regulatory advice. Confirm current rules from Argentina’s National Administration of Drugs, Foods and Medical Technology (Administración Nacional de Medicamentos, Alimentos y Tecnología Médica, ANMAT), the ethics committees, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with qualified advisers. We name only the facility strings and example National Clinical Trial (NCT) identifiers those sources support. We do not invent a principal investigator (PI). We do not claim Hospital Churruca Buenos Aires as a bioaccess® client.

    If you searched Hospital Churruca Visca Buenos Aires first-in-human, Hospital Churruca clinical trial, Churruca-Visca device study, or “go direct Hospital Churruca Buenos Aires,” you followed a campus string ClinicalTrials.gov still publishes. Hospital Churruca in Buenos Aires, Argentina (also registered as Hospital Churruca Visca and Hospital Churruca-Visca), is a real named hospital-campus string on ClinicalTrials.gov. It is not a first-in-human (FIH) medical-device contract research organization (CRO), and it is not the operator of the ANMAT file.

    bioaccess®’s position is simple and it is not adversarial: the hospital is the site. The First-in-Human CRO still owns ANMAT, accredited ethics, investigational import, clinical trial insurance placement with a licensed carrier (the CRO is not the insurance carrier), ISO 14155 (the International Organization for Standardization standard for clinical investigation of medical devices) monitoring, and the FDA 21 CFR 812.28 (Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, section 812.28) package — plus the option to add Colombia or another Latin American country if this campus is not the only fit. Sponsors who skip the CRO and email the hospital still have to rebuild that stack. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

    This page is the named Buenos Aires Hospital Churruca / Churruca-Visca campus. It is DISTINCT from Hospital General de Agudos Dr. Cosme Argerich, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, and other Buenos Aires campuses already published. Sharing Buenos Aires is not a license to collapse them.

    Why the campus name wins the search — and why that is not a CRO

    Device registries write the city, the facility, and a list of NCT IDs. They rarely write the CRO. On a 29 September 2026 ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 pull (all study types; all years), this campus string sits here:

    Counts are unique NCT IDs returned by a ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 pull on 29 September 2026 for the facility strings listed below, restricted to locations in Buenos Aires, Argentina. ALL counts every registered study type; the interventional and DEVICE counts are subsets of ALL. Alias spellings are counted once per NCT ID. We do not combine counts across separate campuses or other cities. We do not invent unpublished CMS IDs. Registry ranking is not a bioaccess® claim that we ran any of these studies.

    • Hospital Churruca (Buenos Aires, Argentina) — registry strings counted: “Hospital Churruca”; “Hospital Churruca – Visca”; “Hospital Churruca Visca”; “Hospital Churruca-Visca”. ALL studies n=10; interventional n=9; DEVICE n=1. Example NCT IDs: NCT00026338, NCT00036647, NCT00040183.

    Aliases are counted once per NCT ID for Buenos Aires locations; 1 of the 10 are observational.

    Those are unique NCT IDs per facility string + city + country. They are not a count of first-in-human device programs bioaccess® ran. They are how a sponsor searching the hospital name lands on a campus without landing on an operator.

    We cite the IDs as facility evidence. We will not invent a PI. We will not claim bioaccess® ran any of them. No live bioaccess® case-study page names this hospital as a client site.

    That is the leak: a founder searching Hospital Churruca in Buenos Aires finds ALL n=10 (DEVICE n=1) without finding ANMAT. A named hospital campus is still a site. An NCT location row is not a CRO.

    The site is the site. The CRO is the operator.

    A named hospital can provide rooms, coordinators, institutional ethics calendars, and investigators who already appear on NCT rows. That is necessary. It is not sufficient for a first-in-human medical device study a U.S. board expects to survive FDA review.

    What the hospital can typically do when a sponsor “goes direct”:

    • Discuss investigator interest and whether a protocol can sit in an existing service line.
    • Share institutional ethics-committee calendars and hospital research rules.
    • Quote visit, staffing, and local procedure costs for the cases they will physically run.

    What the hospital is not built to own for an investigational device:

    • ANMAT. Argentina’s national medicines and devices authority (Administración Nacional de Medicamentos, Alimentos y Tecnología Médica) is the file a sponsor actually needs. A hallway conversation on this campus is not that file. A published statutory target on the trial side is 90 business days and the clock pauses for RFIs. Trial authorization and commercial registro are separate petitions. A hallway conversation at Hospital Churruca is not an Argerich file and is not an ANMAT file.
    • Investigational import. Ethics letter, investigator’s brochure, and an importation permit — end-to-end work, not a PI email. See importer of record for clinical trial devices in Latin America.
    • Clinical trial insurance. Required. The CRO coordinates the policy with a licensed insurer; the CRO is not the insurance carrier. We will not invent a campus-only premium or rate here.
    • ISO 14155 monitoring, electronic data capture (EDC), serious adverse event (SAE) reporting, and the trial master file (TMF). The site may run visits. The CRO runs the quality system the FDA will later ask about.
    • The 21 CFR 812.28 package. Foreign data is eligible for FDA submission and review after good clinical practice (GCP) / ethics documentation. Eligibility is not clearance, and a site master services agreement (MSA) does not produce it.
    • Multi-country optionality. If enrollment or the indication later needs another Latin American country, a single-hospital MSA will not stretch.

    Going direct to this campus is how you confirm a room. It is not how you open an investigational file.

    How ANMAT actually works (the short version)

    Use live bioaccess® Argentina / ANMAT pages for the full pathway. Trial authorization and commercial registro are different petitions. Do not put both on one Gantt labeled “Argentina.” A published statutory target on the trial side is on the order of 90 business days and pauses for RFIs; ask for a protocol-specific calendar rather than treating an NCT row as start-up.

    Ask for a protocol-specific calendar. A hospital email is not ANMAT clearance. bioaccess® manages the file. That is CRO work, not site work.

    All bioaccess® device protocols in this country are run under ISO 14155 and the Declaration of Helsinki. Data is designed to be eligible for FDA submission and review under 21 CFR 812.28 on a case-by-case basis — not a guarantee of clearance or approval. See outside-the-United-States (OUS) FIH data and the FDA Investigational Device Exemption (IDE).

    Not a critique of the hospital

    Hospital Churruca is a serious named Buenos Aires campus on the public registry. ALL n=10 and DEVICE n=1 are registry volume, not a punchline. Use the site when the protocol fits. Hire the operator.

    What the CRO still does after you have the campus on a slide

    1. Regulatory-fit, not tourism. This geography is sourced. One campus is not automatically the right room for every indication. bioaccess® still runs trials in Colombia and the rest of the platform.
    2. Protocol, investigator’s brochure (IB), informed consent form (ICF), insurance, and the ANMAT / ethics packet.
    3. Importer of record and device accountability.
    4. Site activation that is more than a tour: contracts, training, investigational product, EDC, monitoring plan. Activate this campus only if it fits the protocol.
    5. ISO 14155 monitoring and the 21 CFR 812.28 narrative so the dataset is built for a later Pre-Submission (Pre-Sub), IDE, 510(k) premarket notification, De Novo request, premarket approval (PMA), or humanitarian device exemption (HDE) — eligibility, not a promise of FDA action.

    The firm was founded in 2010. That is the operator layer around a campus string.

    Colombia is still on the map

    Public line: bioaccess® runs first-in-human studies in Colombia now — local entity, Miami headquarters, own CRO in Colombia. Colombia’s regulatory framework is changing for the better. INVIMA commercial registration remains. Ethics timing in Panama and Colombia follows each committee’s meeting schedule. The country page’s published per-patient comparison: $12K–$22K vs. $15K–$25K as published on Clinical Trials in Panama. We pick the country the device needs. The founder podcast is Global Trial Accelerators™.

    Frequently asked questions

    Can I contract Hospital Churruca Buenos Aires directly for a device FIH?

    You can try. The hospital can discuss investigator interest, local visit costs, and ethics calendars. It cannot, by ranking on ClinicalTrials.gov, become your ANMAT applicant, importer of record, insurance coordinator, ISO 14155 monitor, or 21 CFR 812.28 packager. Contract the CRO, then let the CRO activate the site if the site fits.

    Did bioaccess® run the NCT IDs listed here?

    No public bioaccess® case-study page names this hospital. We will not invent that claim. This page answers the search; it does not claim the studies.

    Is this the same page as Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires or other CABA hospitals?

    No. Those are distinct Buenos Aires campus pages when live. This page is Hospital Churruca / Churruca-Visca only.

    Did bioaccess® run NCT00026338?

    No. We cite it as facility evidence. We will not invent a sponsor or a PI.

    Next step

    If the search that brought you here was this campus, start as the operator: contact bioaccess® or book from First-in-Human CRO. Argentina sibling: other Buenos Aires campus pages on the bioaccess® blog.

    Julio G. Martinez-Clark, CEO · bioaccess®