Review Mechanisms for Advanced Medical Therapies in Japan and Thailand: A Proposal for the Use of Expert Clinical Benefit Assessments at Designated Institutions

IF 1.1 Q3 ETHICS
Kenji Matsui, Nipan Israsena, Jaranit Kaewkungwal, Pornpimon Adams, David Wendler, Reidar K. Lie
{"title":"Review Mechanisms for Advanced Medical Therapies in Japan and Thailand: A Proposal for the Use of Expert Clinical Benefit Assessments at Designated Institutions","authors":"Kenji Matsui,&nbsp;Nipan Israsena,&nbsp;Jaranit Kaewkungwal,&nbsp;Pornpimon Adams,&nbsp;David Wendler,&nbsp;Reidar K. Lie","doi":"10.1007/s41649-024-00301-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Advanced new therapies, such as stem cell and gene therapies and xenotransplantation, represent challenges for regulatory and ethical review. Major drug agencies, such as in the U.S., India, and Europe, have asserted regulatory authority and require ethics review by local ethics review committees, using the same strict requirements as those for standard drug approvals. In spite of this, unapproved and undocumented stem cell clinics flourish in all of these places, suggesting that current approaches do not offer patients sufficient protection. Japan has attempted another approach, requiring approvals at local levels for all regenerative medical procedures, and a faster approval of promising new interventions. The Japanese approach has, however, also been criticized as not striking a proper balance between early access and a proper assessment of safety and effectiveness. For smaller and less-resourced countries, such as Thailand, one major challenge is limited expertise to conduct the evaluation of these advanced new therapies. This article provides an overview of the issues facing regulators and proposes that countries should restrict the early adoption of advanced new therapies to specialized clinics with appropriate scientific and ethical expertise for review. Review in these institutions should focus on expert clinical benefit assessments for individual patients being offered such interventions, independently of whether they are offered as research or therapy.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"101 - 115"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11785842/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Bioethics Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41649-024-00301-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Advanced new therapies, such as stem cell and gene therapies and xenotransplantation, represent challenges for regulatory and ethical review. Major drug agencies, such as in the U.S., India, and Europe, have asserted regulatory authority and require ethics review by local ethics review committees, using the same strict requirements as those for standard drug approvals. In spite of this, unapproved and undocumented stem cell clinics flourish in all of these places, suggesting that current approaches do not offer patients sufficient protection. Japan has attempted another approach, requiring approvals at local levels for all regenerative medical procedures, and a faster approval of promising new interventions. The Japanese approach has, however, also been criticized as not striking a proper balance between early access and a proper assessment of safety and effectiveness. For smaller and less-resourced countries, such as Thailand, one major challenge is limited expertise to conduct the evaluation of these advanced new therapies. This article provides an overview of the issues facing regulators and proposes that countries should restrict the early adoption of advanced new therapies to specialized clinics with appropriate scientific and ethical expertise for review. Review in these institutions should focus on expert clinical benefit assessments for individual patients being offered such interventions, independently of whether they are offered as research or therapy.

日本和泰国先进医学疗法的审查机制:在指定机构使用专家临床效益评估的建议。
先进的新疗法,如干细胞和基因疗法以及异种移植,对监管和伦理审查提出了挑战。美国、印度和欧洲等国家的主要药品监管机构已经确立了监管权威,并要求当地伦理审查委员会进行伦理审查,使用与标准药物批准相同的严格要求。尽管如此,未经批准和未登记的干细胞诊所在所有这些地方蓬勃发展,这表明目前的方法不能为患者提供足够的保护。日本尝试了另一种方法,要求所有再生医疗程序都要得到地方一级的批准,并加快对有前景的新干预措施的批准。然而,日本的做法也被批评为没有在早期获得和适当的安全性和有效性评估之间取得适当的平衡。对于泰国等较小和资源较少的国家来说,一个主要挑战是对这些先进新疗法进行评估的专业知识有限。本文概述了监管机构面临的问题,并建议各国应将先进新疗法的早期采用限制在具有适当科学和伦理专业知识的专门诊所进行审查。这些机构的审查应侧重于专家对提供此类干预措施的个体患者的临床效益评估,而不管这些干预措施是作为研究还是治疗提供的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
3.40%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Asian Bioethics Review (ABR) is an international academic journal, based in Asia, providing a forum to express and exchange original ideas on all aspects of bioethics, especially those relevant to the region. Published quarterly, the journal seeks to promote collaborative research among scholars in Asia or with an interest in Asia, as well as multi-cultural and multi-disciplinary bioethical studies more generally. It will appeal to all working on bioethical issues in biomedicine, healthcare, caregiving and patient support, genetics, law and governance, health systems and policy, science studies and research. ABR provides analyses, perspectives and insights into new approaches in bioethics, recent changes in biomedical law and policy, developments in capacity building and professional training, and voices or essays from a student’s perspective. The journal includes articles, research studies, target articles, case evaluations and commentaries. It also publishes book reviews and correspondence to the editor. ABR welcomes original papers from all countries, particularly those that relate to Asia. ABR is the flagship publication of the Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore. The Centre for Biomedical Ethics is a collaborating centre on bioethics of the World Health Organization.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信