{"title":"欧盟抗衰老药物的效益评估:监管障碍和多元替代方案。","authors":"Guillermo Marín Penella, Roberto López-Mas","doi":"10.1007/s40656-026-00759-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Anti-ageing medicine is a new movement in healthcare that has as a focus the development of anti-ageing drugs. These medications, like any novel technological product, must be regulated, demonstrating safety and efficacy. In the European Union, the standard of proof for this purpose is the methodology known as randomised controlled trials, which creates a regulatory environment where such pharmaceuticals face an obstacle related to the resources needed to complete the studies. This situation leads to undesirable consequences related to prolonged wait times, the discouragement of research, and difficulties in achieving certain social benefits. As a possible solution, we propose a regulatory alternative based on evidential pluralism, according to which a combination of evidence of correlation and mechanistic evidence can be sufficient to demonstrate causal relationships, regardless of the methodology used. In this way, as different methods could be employed, the authorisation of medicines targeting this condition would not be hindered, and many of the undesirable social consequences surrounding these products may be resolved.</p>","PeriodicalId":56308,"journal":{"name":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","volume":"48 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benefit assessment of anti-ageing medicines in the European Union: regulatory obstacles and pluralistic alternatives.\",\"authors\":\"Guillermo Marín Penella, Roberto López-Mas\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40656-026-00759-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Anti-ageing medicine is a new movement in healthcare that has as a focus the development of anti-ageing drugs. These medications, like any novel technological product, must be regulated, demonstrating safety and efficacy. In the European Union, the standard of proof for this purpose is the methodology known as randomised controlled trials, which creates a regulatory environment where such pharmaceuticals face an obstacle related to the resources needed to complete the studies. This situation leads to undesirable consequences related to prolonged wait times, the discouragement of research, and difficulties in achieving certain social benefits. As a possible solution, we propose a regulatory alternative based on evidential pluralism, according to which a combination of evidence of correlation and mechanistic evidence can be sufficient to demonstrate causal relationships, regardless of the methodology used. In this way, as different methods could be employed, the authorisation of medicines targeting this condition would not be hindered, and many of the undesirable social consequences surrounding these products may be resolved.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56308,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences\",\"volume\":\"48 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-026-00759-w\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-026-00759-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Benefit assessment of anti-ageing medicines in the European Union: regulatory obstacles and pluralistic alternatives.
Anti-ageing medicine is a new movement in healthcare that has as a focus the development of anti-ageing drugs. These medications, like any novel technological product, must be regulated, demonstrating safety and efficacy. In the European Union, the standard of proof for this purpose is the methodology known as randomised controlled trials, which creates a regulatory environment where such pharmaceuticals face an obstacle related to the resources needed to complete the studies. This situation leads to undesirable consequences related to prolonged wait times, the discouragement of research, and difficulties in achieving certain social benefits. As a possible solution, we propose a regulatory alternative based on evidential pluralism, according to which a combination of evidence of correlation and mechanistic evidence can be sufficient to demonstrate causal relationships, regardless of the methodology used. In this way, as different methods could be employed, the authorisation of medicines targeting this condition would not be hindered, and many of the undesirable social consequences surrounding these products may be resolved.
期刊介绍:
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences is an interdisciplinary journal committed to providing an integrative approach to understanding the life sciences. It welcomes submissions from historians, philosophers, biologists, physicians, ethicists and scholars in the social studies of science. Contributors are expected to offer broad and interdisciplinary perspectives on the development of biology, biomedicine and related fields, especially as these perspectives illuminate the foundations, development, and/or implications of scientific practices and related developments. Submissions which are collaborative and feature different disciplinary approaches are especially encouraged, as are submissions written by senior and junior scholars (including graduate students).