人脑早期光遗传学试验的试验后考虑因素

IF 1.4 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Michael White, R. Whittaker
{"title":"人脑早期光遗传学试验的试验后考虑因素","authors":"Michael White, R. Whittaker","doi":"10.2147/oajct.s345482","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": For many clinical trials, the issue of post-trial access to research treatments is straightforward. Sponsors offer a range of follow-on studies, compassionate use programs or expanded access programs to allow participants to continue accessing beneficial experimental treatments. But there are times when this is not always the case and participants are required to stop beneficial treatments and return to standard care. Guidance states that post-trial access should be made available for “those participants who still need an intervention identified as beneficial”. This broad statement has allowed sponsors to make their own interpretation of when an intervention is still “needed” and when it is “beneficial”. As a result, there have been a number of situations where participants of clinical trials have been left afterwards with feelings of abandonment. Participants involved in studies with long-term, invasive treatments can be seen as being particularly vulnerable. Optogenetic technology has the potential to offer hope to people with neurological conditions, especially people who may not respond to current approved treatments. Optogenetics typically involves two components: a gene therapy medicinal product (GTMP) that induces long-term expression of light-reactive proteins within cells, and an active implantable device to stimulate the light-sensitised cells. Neither works without the other, hence for long-term patient benefit, both must remain active and may therefore require maintenance or replacement. With the potential life-long consequences of both components and the difficulty of accessing the brain, there is a need to reconsider post-trial guidelines and whether they are suitable to support early phase optogenetic trial participants. This paper considers the ethical and regulatory requirements in place for post-trial access and care in relation to optogenetic treatments of neurological conditions. We propose that a new perspective with wider responsibilities for sponsors is required when it comes to these types of novel therapies.","PeriodicalId":19500,"journal":{"name":"Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Post-Trial Considerations for an Early Phase Optogenetic Trial in the Human Brain\",\"authors\":\"Michael White, R. Whittaker\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/oajct.s345482\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\": For many clinical trials, the issue of post-trial access to research treatments is straightforward. Sponsors offer a range of follow-on studies, compassionate use programs or expanded access programs to allow participants to continue accessing beneficial experimental treatments. But there are times when this is not always the case and participants are required to stop beneficial treatments and return to standard care. Guidance states that post-trial access should be made available for “those participants who still need an intervention identified as beneficial”. This broad statement has allowed sponsors to make their own interpretation of when an intervention is still “needed” and when it is “beneficial”. As a result, there have been a number of situations where participants of clinical trials have been left afterwards with feelings of abandonment. Participants involved in studies with long-term, invasive treatments can be seen as being particularly vulnerable. Optogenetic technology has the potential to offer hope to people with neurological conditions, especially people who may not respond to current approved treatments. Optogenetics typically involves two components: a gene therapy medicinal product (GTMP) that induces long-term expression of light-reactive proteins within cells, and an active implantable device to stimulate the light-sensitised cells. Neither works without the other, hence for long-term patient benefit, both must remain active and may therefore require maintenance or replacement. With the potential life-long consequences of both components and the difficulty of accessing the brain, there is a need to reconsider post-trial guidelines and whether they are suitable to support early phase optogenetic trial participants. This paper considers the ethical and regulatory requirements in place for post-trial access and care in relation to optogenetic treatments of neurological conditions. We propose that a new perspective with wider responsibilities for sponsors is required when it comes to these types of novel therapies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19500,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/oajct.s345482\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/oajct.s345482","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

:对于许多临床试验来说,试验后获得研究治疗的问题很简单。赞助商提供一系列后续研究、同情使用计划或扩大获取计划,让参与者继续获得有益的实验治疗。但有时情况并非总是如此,参与者被要求停止有益的治疗并返回标准护理。指导意见指出,应为“那些仍然需要被确定为有益干预的参与者”提供试验后的访问。这一宽泛的声明使提案国能够对何时仍然“需要”干预以及何时干预“有益”做出自己的解释。因此,在许多情况下,临床试验的参与者事后都有被抛弃的感觉。参与长期侵入性治疗研究的参与者可能被视为特别脆弱。光遗传学技术有可能为神经系统疾病患者带来希望,尤其是那些对目前批准的治疗方法可能没有反应的人。光遗传学通常包括两个组成部分:一种是诱导细胞内光反应蛋白长期表达的基因治疗药物(GTMP),另一种是刺激光敏细胞的有源植入式设备。两者都不能在没有另一种的情况下工作,因此为了患者的长期利益,两者都必须保持活跃,因此可能需要维护或更换。鉴于这两种成分的潜在终身后果和进入大脑的困难,有必要重新考虑试验后指南,以及它们是否适合支持早期光遗传学试验参与者。本文考虑了与神经疾病的光遗传学治疗相关的试验后获取和护理的伦理和监管要求。我们建议,当涉及到这些类型的新疗法时,需要一个新的视角,对赞助商承担更广泛的责任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Post-Trial Considerations for an Early Phase Optogenetic Trial in the Human Brain
: For many clinical trials, the issue of post-trial access to research treatments is straightforward. Sponsors offer a range of follow-on studies, compassionate use programs or expanded access programs to allow participants to continue accessing beneficial experimental treatments. But there are times when this is not always the case and participants are required to stop beneficial treatments and return to standard care. Guidance states that post-trial access should be made available for “those participants who still need an intervention identified as beneficial”. This broad statement has allowed sponsors to make their own interpretation of when an intervention is still “needed” and when it is “beneficial”. As a result, there have been a number of situations where participants of clinical trials have been left afterwards with feelings of abandonment. Participants involved in studies with long-term, invasive treatments can be seen as being particularly vulnerable. Optogenetic technology has the potential to offer hope to people with neurological conditions, especially people who may not respond to current approved treatments. Optogenetics typically involves two components: a gene therapy medicinal product (GTMP) that induces long-term expression of light-reactive proteins within cells, and an active implantable device to stimulate the light-sensitised cells. Neither works without the other, hence for long-term patient benefit, both must remain active and may therefore require maintenance or replacement. With the potential life-long consequences of both components and the difficulty of accessing the brain, there is a need to reconsider post-trial guidelines and whether they are suitable to support early phase optogenetic trial participants. This paper considers the ethical and regulatory requirements in place for post-trial access and care in relation to optogenetic treatments of neurological conditions. We propose that a new perspective with wider responsibilities for sponsors is required when it comes to these types of novel therapies.
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
Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials
Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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