欧洲的微生物组测试:分析、伦理和监管方面的挑战。

IF 13.8 1区 生物学 Q1 MICROBIOLOGY
Julie Rodriguez, Magali Cordaillat-Simmons, Nelly Badalato, Bernard Berger, Heloise Breton, Raynald de Lahondès, Mélanie Deschasaux-Tanguy, Clara Desvignes, Camille D'Humières, Stephan Kampshoff, Aonghus Lavelle, Amira Metwaly, Narciso M Quijada, Jos F M L Seegers, Austin Udocor, Hub Zwart, Emmanuelle Maguin, Joël Doré, Céline Druart
{"title":"欧洲的微生物组测试:分析、伦理和监管方面的挑战。","authors":"Julie Rodriguez, Magali Cordaillat-Simmons, Nelly Badalato, Bernard Berger, Heloise Breton, Raynald de Lahondès, Mélanie Deschasaux-Tanguy, Clara Desvignes, Camille D'Humières, Stephan Kampshoff, Aonghus Lavelle, Amira Metwaly, Narciso M Quijada, Jos F M L Seegers, Austin Udocor, Hub Zwart, Emmanuelle Maguin, Joël Doré, Céline Druart","doi":"10.1186/s40168-024-01991-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In recent years, human microbiome research has flourished and has drawn attention from both healthcare professionals and general consumers as the human microbiome is now recognized as having a significant influence on human health. This has led to the emergence of companies offering microbiome testing services. Some of these services are sold directly to the consumer via companies' websites or via medical laboratory websites.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>In order to provide an overview of the consumer experience proposed by these microbiome testing services, one single faecal sample was sent to six different companies (five based in Europe and one based in the USA). Two out of the six testing kits were commercialized by medical laboratories, but without any requirement for a medical prescription. The analyses and reports received were discussed with a panel of experts (21 experts from 8 countries) during an online workshop.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This workshop led to the identification of several limitations and challenges related to these kits, including over-promising messages from the companies, a lack of transparency in the methodology used for the analysis and a lack of reliability of the results. The experts considered the interpretations and recommendations provided in the different reports to be premature due to the lack of robust scientific evidence and the analyses associated with the reports to be of limited clinical utility. The experts also discussed the grey areas surrounding the regulatory status of these test kits, including their positioning in the European market. The experts recommended a distinction between regulatory requirements based on the intended use or purpose of the kit: on the one hand, test kits developed to satisfy consumer curiosity, with a clear mention of this objective, and no mention of any disease or risk of disease, and on the other hand, in vitro diagnostic (IVD) CE-marked test kits, which could go deeper into the analysis and interpretation of samples, as such a report would be intended for trained healthcare professionals.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Recommendations or actions, specific to the context of use of microbiome testing kits, are listed to improve the quality and the robustness of these test kits to meet expectations of end users (consumers, patients and healthcare professionals). The need for standardization, robust scientific evidence, qualification of microbiome-based biomarkers and a clear regulatory status in Europe are the main issues that will require attention in the near future to align laboratory development with societal needs and thus foster translation into daily health practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":18447,"journal":{"name":"Microbiome","volume":"12 1","pages":"258"},"PeriodicalIF":13.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11657758/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Microbiome testing in Europe: navigating analytical, ethical and regulatory challenges.\",\"authors\":\"Julie Rodriguez, Magali Cordaillat-Simmons, Nelly Badalato, Bernard Berger, Heloise Breton, Raynald de Lahondès, Mélanie Deschasaux-Tanguy, Clara Desvignes, Camille D'Humières, Stephan Kampshoff, Aonghus Lavelle, Amira Metwaly, Narciso M Quijada, Jos F M L Seegers, Austin Udocor, Hub Zwart, Emmanuelle Maguin, Joël Doré, Céline Druart\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40168-024-01991-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In recent years, human microbiome research has flourished and has drawn attention from both healthcare professionals and general consumers as the human microbiome is now recognized as having a significant influence on human health. This has led to the emergence of companies offering microbiome testing services. Some of these services are sold directly to the consumer via companies' websites or via medical laboratory websites.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>In order to provide an overview of the consumer experience proposed by these microbiome testing services, one single faecal sample was sent to six different companies (five based in Europe and one based in the USA). Two out of the six testing kits were commercialized by medical laboratories, but without any requirement for a medical prescription. The analyses and reports received were discussed with a panel of experts (21 experts from 8 countries) during an online workshop.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This workshop led to the identification of several limitations and challenges related to these kits, including over-promising messages from the companies, a lack of transparency in the methodology used for the analysis and a lack of reliability of the results. The experts considered the interpretations and recommendations provided in the different reports to be premature due to the lack of robust scientific evidence and the analyses associated with the reports to be of limited clinical utility. The experts also discussed the grey areas surrounding the regulatory status of these test kits, including their positioning in the European market. The experts recommended a distinction between regulatory requirements based on the intended use or purpose of the kit: on the one hand, test kits developed to satisfy consumer curiosity, with a clear mention of this objective, and no mention of any disease or risk of disease, and on the other hand, in vitro diagnostic (IVD) CE-marked test kits, which could go deeper into the analysis and interpretation of samples, as such a report would be intended for trained healthcare professionals.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Recommendations or actions, specific to the context of use of microbiome testing kits, are listed to improve the quality and the robustness of these test kits to meet expectations of end users (consumers, patients and healthcare professionals). The need for standardization, robust scientific evidence, qualification of microbiome-based biomarkers and a clear regulatory status in Europe are the main issues that will require attention in the near future to align laboratory development with societal needs and thus foster translation into daily health practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18447,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Microbiome\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"258\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11657758/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Microbiome\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-024-01991-x\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Microbiome","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-024-01991-x","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:近年来,人类微生物组研究蓬勃发展,并引起了卫生保健专业人员和普通消费者的关注,因为人类微生物组现在被认为对人类健康具有重要影响。这导致了提供微生物组测试服务的公司的出现。其中一些服务通过公司网站或医学实验室网站直接出售给消费者。方法:为了提供这些微生物组测试服务所建议的消费者体验的概述,将单个粪便样本发送给六家不同的公司(五家位于欧洲,一家位于美国)。6个检测包中有2个已由医学实验室商业化,但不需要医疗处方。在一次在线研讨会上,与一个专家小组(来自8个国家的21名专家)讨论了收到的分析和报告。结果:本次研讨会确定了与这些工具包相关的几个限制和挑战,包括公司的过度承诺信息,用于分析的方法缺乏透明度以及结果缺乏可靠性。专家们认为,由于缺乏有力的科学证据,不同报告中提供的解释和建议为时过早,而且与报告相关的分析临床实用性有限。专家们还讨论了围绕这些检测试剂盒的监管地位的灰色地带,包括它们在欧洲市场的定位。专家建议区别监管要求的基础上使用意图或目的的工具:一方面,测试工具开发以满足消费者的好奇心,与一个明确的提到这个目标,并没有提及任何疾病或疾病的风险,另一方面,体外诊断(试管)ce标记测试套件,可以深入分析和解释的样本,这样一份报告将用于训练有素的医疗专业人员。结论:针对微生物组检测试剂盒的使用情况,列出了建议或行动,以提高这些检测试剂盒的质量和稳健性,以满足最终用户(消费者、患者和医疗保健专业人员)的期望。标准化的需要、有力的科学证据、基于微生物组的生物标志物的资格鉴定以及欧洲明确的监管地位是近期需要关注的主要问题,以便使实验室发展与社会需求保持一致,从而促进转化为日常卫生实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Microbiome testing in Europe: navigating analytical, ethical and regulatory challenges.

Background: In recent years, human microbiome research has flourished and has drawn attention from both healthcare professionals and general consumers as the human microbiome is now recognized as having a significant influence on human health. This has led to the emergence of companies offering microbiome testing services. Some of these services are sold directly to the consumer via companies' websites or via medical laboratory websites.

Methodology: In order to provide an overview of the consumer experience proposed by these microbiome testing services, one single faecal sample was sent to six different companies (five based in Europe and one based in the USA). Two out of the six testing kits were commercialized by medical laboratories, but without any requirement for a medical prescription. The analyses and reports received were discussed with a panel of experts (21 experts from 8 countries) during an online workshop.

Results: This workshop led to the identification of several limitations and challenges related to these kits, including over-promising messages from the companies, a lack of transparency in the methodology used for the analysis and a lack of reliability of the results. The experts considered the interpretations and recommendations provided in the different reports to be premature due to the lack of robust scientific evidence and the analyses associated with the reports to be of limited clinical utility. The experts also discussed the grey areas surrounding the regulatory status of these test kits, including their positioning in the European market. The experts recommended a distinction between regulatory requirements based on the intended use or purpose of the kit: on the one hand, test kits developed to satisfy consumer curiosity, with a clear mention of this objective, and no mention of any disease or risk of disease, and on the other hand, in vitro diagnostic (IVD) CE-marked test kits, which could go deeper into the analysis and interpretation of samples, as such a report would be intended for trained healthcare professionals.

Conclusions: Recommendations or actions, specific to the context of use of microbiome testing kits, are listed to improve the quality and the robustness of these test kits to meet expectations of end users (consumers, patients and healthcare professionals). The need for standardization, robust scientific evidence, qualification of microbiome-based biomarkers and a clear regulatory status in Europe are the main issues that will require attention in the near future to align laboratory development with societal needs and thus foster translation into daily health practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Microbiome
Microbiome MICROBIOLOGY-
CiteScore
21.90
自引率
2.60%
发文量
198
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊介绍: Microbiome is a journal that focuses on studies of microbiomes in humans, animals, plants, and the environment. It covers both natural and manipulated microbiomes, such as those in agriculture. The journal is interested in research that uses meta-omics approaches or novel bioinformatics tools and emphasizes the community/host interaction and structure-function relationship within the microbiome. Studies that go beyond descriptive omics surveys and include experimental or theoretical approaches will be considered for publication. The journal also encourages research that establishes cause and effect relationships and supports proposed microbiome functions. However, studies of individual microbial isolates/species without exploring their impact on the host or the complex microbiome structures and functions will not be considered for publication. Microbiome is indexed in BIOSIS, Current Contents, DOAJ, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, PubMed Central, and Science Citations Index Expanded.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信