1
|
Faltus T. The Medicinal Phage-Regulatory Roadmap for Phage Therapy under EU Pharmaceutical Legislation. Viruses 2024; 16:443. [PMID: 38543808 PMCID: PMC10974108 DOI: 10.3390/v16030443] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2024] [Revised: 03/05/2024] [Accepted: 03/07/2024] [Indexed: 05/23/2024] Open
Abstract
Bacteriophage therapy is a promising approach to treating bacterial infections. Research and development of bacteriophage therapy is intensifying due to the increase in antibiotic resistance and the faltering development of new antibiotics. Bacteriophage therapy uses bacteriophages (phages), i.e., prokaryotic viruses, to specifically target and kill pathogenic bacteria. The legal handling of this type of therapy raises several questions. These include whether phage therapeutics belong to a specially regulated class of medicinal products, and which legal framework should be followed with regard to the various technical ways in which phage therapeutics can be manufactured and administered. The article shows to which class of medicinal products phage therapeutics from wild type phages and from genetically modified (designer) phages do or do not belong. Furthermore, the article explains which legal framework is relevant for the manufacture and administration of phage therapeutics, which are manufactured in advance in a uniform, patient-independent manner, and for tailor-made patient-specific phage therapeutics. For the systematically coherent, successful translation of phage therapy, the article considers pharmaceutical law and related legal areas, such as genetic engineering law. Finally, the article shows how the planned legislative revisions of Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 may affect the legal future of phage therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timo Faltus
- Chair of Public Law, Law School, Faculty of Law, Economics and Business, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, 06099 Halle an der Saale, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Menary J, Fuller SS. New genomic techniques, old divides: Stakeholder attitudes towards new biotechnology regulation in the EU and UK. PLoS One 2024; 19:e0287276. [PMID: 38446826 PMCID: PMC10917245 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287276] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2023] [Accepted: 11/21/2023] [Indexed: 03/08/2024] Open
Abstract
The European Union and United Kingdom are in the process of establishing new regulation regarding the use of new genomic techniques in crop and animal breeding. As part of this process, consultations have been launched to understand the views of stakeholders towards the use of new genomic techniques in plant and animal breeding. The responsible research and innovation framework emphasises the importance of dialogue between technology developers and stakeholders, including the public, but what are the opinions of stakeholders towards the regulation of NGTs in Europe and do they view these consultations as opportunities to engage with technology governance? We conducted semi-structured interviews with experts from a range of agri-food stakeholder groups in the European Union and United Kingdom to understand current attitudes towards new biotechnology regulation, how they viewed the process of consultation in both places and what influence they felt they had in shaping regulations. We found that the discussion is similar in both EU and UK, with predictable and fixed opinions determined by attitudes towards the perceived risks associated with direct mutagenesis. Both UK and EU consultations were considered to have the same weaknesses and stakeholders discussed a desire for more dialogic forms of engagement. We highlight several options for new forms of involvement in biotechnology regulation by exploring relevant responsible research and innovation literature.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan Menary
- Health Systems Collaborative, Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Sebastian S. Fuller
- Health Systems Collaborative, Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zimny T. New genomic techniques and their European Union reform. Potential policy changes and their implications. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2022; 10:1019081. [PMID: 36246372 PMCID: PMC9562193 DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.1019081] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/14/2022] [Accepted: 09/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
The article discusses amendment options (no significant change, lowering of administrative burdens or exemption of certain products from the legislation) for the European Union (EU) authorization procedures of New Genomic Techniques’ (NGT) products and their consequences for the sector and research institutions, particularly in the context of internal functioning, placing products on the market and international trade. A reform of the EU regulatory system requires a change in the procedures for the authorization of NGT products, otherwise EU researchers and investors may still be at a competitive disadvantage (as compared to Argentina, Brazil, Canada, United States or the United Kingdom) due to the inefficiency of the current system and the committee procedure for authorization. New legislation, currently being adopted in the United Kingdom is also presented for comparison.
Collapse
|
4
|
Sharma A, Abrahamian P, Carvalho R, Choudhary M, Paret ML, Vallad GE, Jones JB. Future of Bacterial Disease Management in Crop Production. ANNUAL REVIEW OF PHYTOPATHOLOGY 2022; 60:259-282. [PMID: 35790244 DOI: 10.1146/annurev-phyto-021621-121806] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
Bacterial diseases are a constant threat to crop production globally. Current management strategies rely on an array of tactics, including improved cultural practices; application of bactericides, plant activators, and biocontrol agents; and use of resistant varieties when available. However, effective management remains a challenge, as the longevity of deployed tactics is threatened by constantly changing bacterial populations. Increased scrutiny of the impact of pesticides on human and environmental health underscores the need for alternative solutions that are durable, sustainable, accessible to farmers, and environmentally friendly. In this review, we discuss the strengths and shortcomings of existing practices and dissect recent advances that may shape the future of bacterial disease management. We conclude that disease resistance through genome modification may be the most effective arsenal against bacterial diseases. Nonetheless, more research is necessary for developing novel bacterial disease management tactics to meet the food demand of a growing global population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anuj Sharma
- Department of Plant Pathology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA;
| | - Peter Abrahamian
- Department of Plant Pathology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA;
- Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Wimauma, Florida, USA
- Plant Pathogen Confirmatory Diagnostic Laboratory, USDA-APHIS, Beltsville, Maryland, USA
| | - Renato Carvalho
- Department of Plant Pathology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA;
| | - Manoj Choudhary
- Department of Plant Pathology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA;
| | - Mathews L Paret
- Department of Plant Pathology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA;
- North Florida Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Quincy, Florida, USA
| | - Gary E Vallad
- Department of Plant Pathology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA;
- Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Wimauma, Florida, USA
| | - Jeffrey B Jones
- Department of Plant Pathology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA;
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Jenkins D, Dobert R, Atanassova A, Pavely C. Impacts of the regulatory environment for gene editing on delivering beneficial products. IN VITRO CELLULAR & DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY. PLANT : JOURNAL OF THE TISSUE CULTURE ASSOCIATION 2021; 57:609-626. [PMID: 34429575 PMCID: PMC8376113 DOI: 10.1007/s11627-021-10201-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2021] [Accepted: 05/20/2021] [Indexed: 05/12/2023]
Abstract
Various genome-editing technologies have been embraced by plant breeders across the world as promising tools for the improvement of different crops to deliver consumer benefits, improve agronomic performance, and increase sustainability. The uptake of genome-editing technologies in plant breeding greatly depends on how governments regulate its use. Some major agricultural production countries have already developed regulatory approaches that enable the application of genome editing for crop improvement, while other governments are in the early stages of formulating policy. Central to the discussion is the principle of "like products should be treated in like ways" and the subsequent utilization of exclusions and exemptions from the scope of GMO regulations for these products. In some countries, the outcomes of genome editing that could also have been achieved through conventional breeding have been defined as not needing GMO regulatory oversight. In this paper, we provide a short overview of plant breeding and the history of plant biotechnology policy development, the different classes of current regulatory systems and their use of exemptions and exclusions for genome-edited plants, and the potential benefits of such approaches as it relates to achieving societal goals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Jenkins
- Pairwise Plants Services, Inc., 807 East Main Street, Suite 4-100, Durham, NC 27701 USA
| | - Raymond Dobert
- Bayer Crop Science, 700 Chesterfield Parkway West, St. Louis, MO 63017 USA
| | - Ana Atanassova
- BASF Business Coordination Centre – Innovation Center Gent, Technologiepark 101, 9052 Gent, Belgium
| | - Chloe Pavely
- Calyxt, Inc., 2800 Mount Ridge Road, Roseville, MN 55113 USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Legal and practical challenges to authorization of gene edited plants in the EU. N Biotechnol 2020; 60:183-188. [PMID: 33115638 DOI: 10.1016/j.nbt.2020.10.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2020] [Revised: 10/16/2020] [Accepted: 10/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
According to a predominant interpretation of the C-528/16 judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union, mutants resulting from gene editing, even those featuring only single nucleotide variants, should be subject to the authorization procedures designed for organisms developed through genetic modification (i.e. insertion of large DNA fragments). In this article, we illustrate practical problems with the authorization of products of gene editing in the EU. On the basis of these problems, we analyze the influence of the current interpretation of EU legislation and judgment on the practical ability to authorize and detect such products on the EU market. We show that the predominant interpretation of the judgment leads to legally unacceptable consequences, in particular to the violation of the principle of proportionality with regard to individuals who wish to develop and market products of gene editing. As a result of our considerations, we show that the C-528/16 judgment did not need to be interpreted in the dominant way.
Collapse
|