1
|
Pachocki J, Verter F. Polish regulatory system regarding ATMP hospital exemptions. Front Immunol 2024; 15:1379134. [PMID: 38803487 PMCID: PMC11128580 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1379134] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2024] [Accepted: 04/16/2024] [Indexed: 05/29/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction This article explains the current regulatory system in Poland regarding Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products given under Hospital Exemptions (ATMP-HE). Methods The relevant sections of Polish legislation are translated into English and their interaction is described. Results We analyze the impact of these regulations from the perspective of three stakeholder groups: manufacturers, physicians, and patients. Amendments enacted between 2018 and 2023 have substantially changed Polish implementation of the ATMP-HE pathway. In Poland, most ATMP-HE treatments have been therapies employing Mesenchymal Stromal Cells (MSC). Discussion Comparison to other European countries shows that Poland is within the mainstream of EU practices regarding ATMP-HE implementation. One notable issue is that Poland has relatively low per capita spending on healthcare, and ATMP-HE in Poland must be funded from outside the government healthcare system. Conclusions. The original intention of the legislation that created ATMP-HE was to allow access to experimental therapies for patients with unmet needs. It remains to be seen if that mission can be fulfilled amidst conflicting pressures from various stakeholder groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Frances Verter
- Parent’s Guide to Cord Blood Foundation, Brookeville, MD, United States
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Zhang JY. Commoning genomic solidarity to improve global health equality. CELL GENOMICS 2023; 3:100405. [PMID: 37868031 PMCID: PMC10589616 DOI: 10.1016/j.xgen.2023.100405] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2023]
Abstract
This article underlines two key asynchronies between prevailing governing logic and expanding practices in somatic human genome editing that are hindering an effective and orderly translation of the new technology into public good. The first is a "genomic sovereignty" framing adopted by a number of non-Western countries that may exacerbate data biases in global research and that directs policy attention away from the necessary structural changes required to achieve non-discriminatory and equitable genomic healthcare. The other is a global deficiency in attending to "science at large": the challenge of regulating new assemblages of societal interests that advocate controversial or experimental research, often outside of conventional institutions and aided by "policy shopping." Both issues point to the fact that genomic research does not represent a well-defined scientific commons but rather a domain that requires active "commoning," with the aim of fostering genomic solidarity that coordinates responsible research within and across national boundaries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joy Y. Zhang
- Centre for Global Science and Epistemic Justice, Division for the Study of Law, Society and Social Justice, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Beetler DJ, Di Florio DN, Law EW, Groen CM, Windebank AJ, Peterson QP, Fairweather D. The evolving regulatory landscape in regenerative medicine. Mol Aspects Med 2023; 91:101138. [PMID: 36050142 PMCID: PMC10162454 DOI: 10.1016/j.mam.2022.101138] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2022] [Accepted: 08/12/2022] [Indexed: 01/17/2023]
Abstract
Regenerative medicine as a field has emerged as a new component of modern medicine and medical research that encompasses a wide range of products including cellular and acellular therapies. As this new field emerged, regulatory agencies like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rapidly adapted existing regulatory frameworks to address the transplantation, gene therapy, cell-based therapeutics, and acellular biologics that fall under the broader regenerative medicine umbrella. Where it has not been possible to modify existing regulation and processes, entirely new frameworks have been generated with the intention of providing flexible, forward-facing systems to regulate this rapidly growing field. This review discusses the current state of FDA regulatory affairs in the context of stem cells and extracellular vesicles by highlighting gaps in the current regulatory system and then discussing where regulatory science in regenerative medicine may be headed based on these gaps and the FDA's historical ability to deal with emerging fields. Lastly, we utilize case studies in stem cell and acellular based treatments to demonstrate how regulatory science has evolved in regenerative medicine and highlight the ongoing clinical efforts and challenges of these therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danielle J Beetler
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA; Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA
| | - Damian N Di Florio
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA; Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA
| | - Ethan W Law
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA; Center for Regenerative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA
| | - Chris M Groen
- Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA
| | - Anthony J Windebank
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA; Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA
| | - Quinn P Peterson
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA; Center for Regenerative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA
| | - DeLisa Fairweather
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55902, USA; Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA; Department of Environmental Health Sciences and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
de Kanter AFJ, Jongsma KR, Verhaar MC, Bredenoord AL. The Ethical Implications of Tissue Engineering for Regenerative Purposes: A Systematic Review. TISSUE ENGINEERING PART B: REVIEWS 2022; 29:167-187. [PMID: 36112697 PMCID: PMC10122262 DOI: 10.1089/ten.teb.2022.0033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Tissue Engineering (TE) is a branch of Regenerative Medicine (RM) that combines stem cells and biomaterial scaffolds to create living tissue constructs to restore patients' organs after injury or disease. Over the last decade, emerging technologies such as 3D bioprinting, biofabrication, supramolecular materials, induced pluripotent stem cells, and organoids have entered the field. While this rapidly evolving field is expected to have great therapeutic potential, its development from bench to bedside presents several ethical and societal challenges. To make sure TE will reach its ultimate goal of improving patient welfare, these challenges should be mapped out and evaluated. Therefore, we performed a systematic review of the ethical implications of the development and application of TE for regenerative purposes, as mentioned in the academic literature. A search query in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and PhilPapers yielded 2451 unique articles. After systematic screening, 237 relevant ethical and biomedical articles published between 2008 and 2021 were included in our review. We identified a broad range of ethical implications that could be categorized under 10 themes. Seven themes trace the development from bench to bedside: (1) animal experimentation, (2) handling human tissue, (3) informed consent, (4) therapeutic potential, (5) risk and safety, (6) clinical translation, and (7) societal impact. Three themes represent ethical safeguards relevant to all developmental phases: (8) scientific integrity, (9) regulation, and (10) patient and public involvement. This review reveals that since 2008 a significant body of literature has emerged on how to design clinical trials for TE in a responsible manner. However, several topics remain in need of more attention. These include the acceptability of alternative translational pathways outside clinical trials, soft impacts on society and questions of ownership over engineered tissues. Overall, this overview of the ethical and societal implications of the field will help promote responsible development of new interventions in TE and RM. It can also serve as a valuable resource and educational tool for scientists, engineers, and clinicians in the field by providing an overview of the ethical considerations relevant to their work. Impact statement To our knowledge, this is the first time that the ethical implications of Tissue Engineering (TE) have been reviewed systematically. By gathering existing scholarly work and identifying knowledge gaps, this review facilitates further research into the ethical and societal implications of TE and Regenerative Medicine (RM) and other emerging biomedical technologies. Moreover, it will serve as a valuable resource and educational tool for scientists, engineers, and clinicians in the field by providing an overview of the ethical considerations relevant to their work. As such, our review may promote successful and responsible development of new strategies in TE and RM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne-Floor Johanna de Kanter
- University Medical Centre Utrecht, Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Stratenum 6.131, PO Box 85500, Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands, 3508 GA,
| | - Karin Rolanda Jongsma
- University Medical Centre Utrecht, Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Utrecht, Netherlands,
| | - Marianne C Verhaar
- University Medical Centre Utrecht, Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, Utrecht, Netherlands,
| | - Annelien L Bredenoord
- University Medical Centre Utrecht, Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Utrecht, Netherlands
- Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Philosophy, Rotterdam, Netherlands,
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Orozco-Solares TE, León-Moreno LC, Rojas-Rizo A, Manguart-Paez K, Caplan AI. Allogeneic Mesenchymal Stem Cell-based treatments legislation in Latin America: The need for standardization in a medical tourism context. Stem Cells Dev 2022; 31:143-162. [PMID: 35216516 DOI: 10.1089/scd.2022.0013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Medicinal Signaling Cells (MSCs) secrete bioactive molecules with paracrine effects. These cells are widely used in basic and clinical research to treat several human diseases and medically relevant conditions. Although there are promising results, only a few treatments are approved of its administration, and clinicians should not underestimate the potential risks of its application without proper authorization. However, some treatments advertised mainly through the internet are not supported by solid or rigorous scientific evidence, legal consent, or the assurance of safety and efficacy, especially in the cell therapy tourism space. This practice allows patients to travel from stringently regulated countries to less restricted ones and increases the flourishing of non-endorsed therapies in these regions. Clinical applications of MSC-based treatments are subject to health legislation, and regulatory agencies are responsible for supervising their manufacture, quality control, and marketing approval. Consensus is needed to homologize and strengthen health legislation regarding those therapies, particularly in regions where medical tourism is frequent. Latin America and the Caribbean, an overlooked region with very heterogeneous legislation regarding cell therapy, is a popular medical tourism destination. Brazil and Argentina created regulations to supervise cell-based treatments manufacture, quality, and marketing. While Mexico, considered the second-largest drug market in Latin America, does not recognize nor authorize any cells as therapy. Also, some regulatory bodies miss the importance of several critical GMP processes to ensure reproducible, reliable, safe, and potentially more favorable results and do not consider them in their legislation. These inconsistencies make the region vulnerable to unproven or unethical treatments, potentially becoming a public health problem involving people from countries worldwide. This review attempts to generate awareness for the legal status of cell therapies in Latin America and the need for standardization as this region is a significant medical tourism destination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Lilia Carolina León-Moreno
- Universidad de Guadalajara, 27802, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico.,Provida Salud Integral, Research and Development, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico;
| | - Andrea Rojas-Rizo
- Provida Salud Integral, Mesenchymal Stem Cell Bank, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico;
| | - Karen Manguart-Paez
- Provida Salud Integral, Mesenchymal Stem Cell Bank, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico;
| | - Arnold I Caplan
- Case Western Reserve University, 2546, Department of Biology, Cleveland, Ohio, United States;
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Master Z, Matthews KRW, Abou-El-Enein M. Unproven stem cell interventions: A global public health problem requiring global deliberation. Stem Cell Reports 2021; 16:1435-1445. [PMID: 34107243 PMCID: PMC8190665 DOI: 10.1016/j.stemcr.2021.05.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2020] [Revised: 05/10/2021] [Accepted: 05/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
The unproven stem cell intervention (SCI) industry is a global health problem. Despite efforts of some nations, the industry continues to flourish. In this paper, we call for a global approach and the establishment of a World Health Organization (WHO) Expert Advisory Committee on Regenerative Medicine to tackle this issue and provide guidance. The WHO committee can harmonize national regulations; promote regulatory approaches responsive to unmet patient needs; and formulate an education campaign against misinformation. Fostering an international dialog and developing recommendations that can be adopted by member states would effectively address the global market of unproven SCIs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zubin Master
- Biomedical Ethics Research Program and the Center for Regenerative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
| | - Kirstin R W Matthews
- Baker Institute for Public Policy Center for Health and Biosciences, Rice University, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Mohamed Abou-El-Enein
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, and Department of Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Joint USC/CHLA Cell Therapy Program, University of Southern California, and Children Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Affiliation(s)
- Douglas Sipp
- RIKEN Center for Biosystems Dynamics, Kobe, Japan.,Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.,Keio University Global Research Institute, Tokyo, Japan.,RIKEN Advanced Intelligence Project, Tokyo, Japan
| | | |
Collapse
|