Unproven Stem Cell-Based Interventions: Advancing Policy through Stakeholder Collaboration

Perspectives on Challenges to Cell Therapy Development in Taiwan: Strengthening Evidential Standards and Ways Forward

Over the past years, the field of regenerative medicine and cell therapy has garnered much interest, extending beyond the bench to broader use, and commercialization. These therapies undergo stringent regulatory oversight as a result of their complexities and potential risk across different jurisdictions. Taiwan’s government, with the aim of developing the country as a hub for regenerative medicine in Asia, enacted a dual track act to promote the development of regenerative and cell therapy products. This qualitative study used purposive sampling to recruit sixteen experts (Twelve respondents from medical institutions and four respondents from the industry) to understand their perspectives on one of the regulatory tracks which governs the medical use of cell technologies and challenges regarding its implementation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, transcribed, coded and thematically analyzed. Three major themes emerged from the analysis: 1) Perceptions of the “Special Regulation for Cell Therapy” 2) Emerging issues and controversies on the medical use of cell technologies in private clinics, and 3) Challenges impeding the clinical innovation of cell technologies. As reported by the experts, it was clear that the special regulation for cell therapy was aimed at legalizing the clinical use of cell therapy in a similar fashion to an evidence-based pathway, to promote clinical innovation, ensure manufacturing consistency, and improve oversight on cell-based therapies. Thus, the regulation addresses the issues of safety concerns, patient’s access and stem cell tourism. However, the limited approved cell techniques, quality control during cell processing, time, and criteria used in evaluating applications in addition to the need to develop evidential standards for clinical evidence are some of the difficulties faced. Thus, policy interventions on funding, educational resources, training, and regulatory clarity addressing these challenges may positively impact clinical innovation of cell therapy in Taiwan.

Inclusivity and diversity: Integrating international perspectives on stem cell challenges and potential

Regenerative medicine has great potential. The pace of scientific advance is exciting and the medical opportunities for regeneration and repair may be transformative. However, concerns continue to grow, relating to problems caused both by unscrupulous private clinics offering unregulated therapies based on little or no evidence and by premature regulatory approval on the basis of insufficient scientific rationale and clinical evidence. An initiative by the InterAcademy Partnership convened experts worldwide to identify opportunities and challenges, with a focus on stem cells. This was designed to be inclusive and consensus outputs reflected the diversity of the global research population. Among issues addressed for supporting research and innovation while protecting patients were ethical assessment; pre-clinical and clinical research; regulatory authorization and medicines access; and engagement with patients, policy makers, and the public. The InterAcademy Partnership (IAP) identified options for action for sharing good practice and building collaboration within the scientific community and with other stakeholders worldwide.

Texas H.B. 810: Increased Access to Stem Cell Interventions or an Increase in Unproven Treatments?

Born of the expectations and hype associated with regenerative medicine, there are now numerous clinics around the world selling stem cell-based interventions (SCBI) that have yet to be proven effective or safe, with little to no accounting of the outcomes being collected. In the United States, SCBI are overseen by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but several SCBI clinics have been pushing for policies to expand access and circumvent FDA oversight. Related to this effort, in 2017, Texas passed a bill, HB 810, which allows clinics to provide "investigational stem cell treatments to patients with certain severe chronic diseases or terminal illnesses." In this article, we describe how the new law relates to another deregulation movement, state and federal, the Right to Try laws, the content of HB 810, and the state legislators' intent in passing HB 810.

The involvement of Canadian physicians in promoting and providing unproven and unapproved stem cell interventions

Background

Direct to consumer offerings of unproven stem cell interventions (SCIs) is a pressing scientific and policy issue. According to media reports, providers of SCIs have emerged in Canada. This study provides the first systematic scan of Canadian providers and associated trends and claims.

Methods

The study sample consisted of 15 websites retrieved from a Google™ keyword search. The websites were assessed by a rater using a peer-reviewed coding frame that queried treatment location, stem cell offerings, treatment claims, supporting evidence, and legal and regulatory compliance. A second rater reviewed a subset of the websites for purposes of inter-rater reliability. Disagreements between raters were resolved by consensus. Data collected by the raters was analyzed in SPSS.

Results

Physicians are the dominant treatment providers in Canada. Providers operate in urban and semi-urban areas in the most populous provinces. SCIs provided are mainly autologous adult stem cells for multiple conditions including musculoskeletal disorders, spinal cord injury (SCI) and diabetes. Efficacy and benefits of treatment are prominently and positively portrayed, while risks are not mentioned or portrayed as trivial. Regulatory concerns are not discussed.

Conclusions

The involvement of physicians in promoting and providing unproven and unapproved SCIs raises significant ethical, legal and regulatory concerns. Treatment claims and trends appear to contravene applicable professional standards, statutory obligations, and consumer protection laws. While the number of providers observed is still marginal, urgent and proactive regulatory response is needed to prevent proliferation of a potentially exploitative and harmful market for unproven SCIs in Canada.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12910-018-0273-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.