Closing the regulatory regress: GMP accreditation in stem cell laboratories

Can harmonized regulation overcome intra-European differences? Insights from a European Phase III stem cell trial

Harmonized regulation of research with human stem cells in Europe has shaped innovation in regenerative medicine. Findings from a Phase III academic clinical trial of an autologous cell procedure illustrate the obstacles that a multinational trial faces. A typology of the obstacles encountered, may help other teams embarking upon trials. The findings throw light on the situation of clinician-scientists in clinical innovation, as the expertise to run scientific trials is very complex. The innovation route of clinical translation takes insufficient account of the interdependencies between multiple social and cultural factors from outside the laboratory and the clinic. For ethical reasons, however, academic and business routes to stem cell treatments ought to be enabled by the regulators. Suggestions arise, how academics can prepare for trials, that academic research needs better institutional support and that new models of medical innovation may need to be developed for regenerative medicine.

Accelerating Innovation in the Creation of Biovalue: The Cell and Gene Therapy Catapult

The field of regenerative medicine (RM) has considerable therapeutic promise that is proving difficult to realize. As a result, governments have supported the establishment of intermediary agencies to "accelerate" innovation. This article examines in detail one such agency, the United Kingdom's Cell and Gene Therapy Catapult (CGTC). We describe CGTC's role as an accelerator agency and its value narrative, which combines both "health and wealth." Drawing on the notion of sociotechnical imaginaries, we unpack the tensions within this narrative and its instantiation as the CGTC cell therapy infrastructure is built and engages with other agencies, some of which have different priorities and roles to play within the RM field.

Implementation of Good Laboratory Practices (GLP) in basic scientific research: Translating the concept beyond regulatory compliance

The principles of Good Laboratory Practices (GLPs) are mainly intended for the laboratories performing studies for regulatory compliances. However, today GLP can be applied to broad disciplines of science to cater to the needs of the experimental objectives, generation of quality data and assay reproducibility. Considering its significance, it can now be applied in academics; industries as well as government set ups throughout the world. GLP is the best way to promote the reliability, reproducibility of the test data and hence facilitates the international acceptability. Now it is high time to translate and implement the concept of GLP beyond regulatory studies. Thus, it can pave the way for better understanding of scientific problems and help to maintain a good human and environmental health. Through this review, we have made an attempt to explore the uses of GLP principles in different fields of science and its acceptability as well as looking for its future perspectives.

Doing laboratory ethnography: reflections on method in scientific workplaces

Laboratory ethnography extended the social scientist's gaze into the day-to-day accomplishment of scientific practice. Here we reflect upon our own ethnographies of biomedical scientific workspaces to provoke methodological discussion on the doing of laboratory ethnography. What we provide is less a 'how to' guide and more a commentary on what to look for and what to look at. We draw upon our empirical research with stem cell laboratories and animal houses, teams producing robotic surgical tools, musicians sonifying data science, a psychiatric genetics laboratory, and scientists developing laboratory grown meat. We use these cases to example a set of potential ethnographic themes worthy of pursuit: science epistemics and the extended laboratory, the interaction order of scientific work, sensory realms and the rending of science as sensible, conferences as performative sites, and the spaces, places and temporalities of scientific work.

Optimising Translational Research Opportunities: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis of Basic and Clinician Scientists' Perspectives of Factors Which Enable or Hinder Translational Research

INTRODUCTION

Translational research is central to international health policy, research and funding initiatives. Despite increasing use of the term, the translation of basic science discoveries into clinical practice is not straightforward. This systematic search and narrative synthesis aimed to examine factors enabling or hindering translational research from the perspective of basic and clinician scientists, a key stakeholder group in translational research, and to draw policy-relevant implications for organisations seeking to optimise translational research opportunities.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched SCOPUS and Web of Science from inception until April 2015 for papers reporting scientists' views of the factors they perceive as enabling or hindering the conduct of translational research. We screened 8,295 papers from electronic database searches and 20 papers from hand searches and citation tracking, identifying 26 studies of qualitative, quantitative or mixed method designs. We used a narrative synthesis approach and identified the following themes: 1) differing concepts of translational research 2) research processes as a barrier to translational research; 3) perceived cultural divide between research and clinical care; 4) interdisciplinary collaboration as enabling translation research, but dependent on the quality of prior and current social relationships; 5) translational research as entrepreneurial science. Across all five themes, factors enabling or hindering translational research were largely shaped by wider social, organisational, and structural factors.

CONCLUSION

To optimise translational research, policy could consider refining translational research models to better reflect scientists' experiences, fostering greater collaboration and buy in from all types of scientists. Organisations could foster cultural change, ensuring that organisational practices and systems keep pace with the change in knowledge production brought about by the translational research agenda.