规范电子烟临床研究的问题

C. Bullen, O. Knight-West
{"title":"规范电子烟临床研究的问题","authors":"C. Bullen, O. Knight-West","doi":"10.3109/10601333.2014.976230","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract E-cigarettes have become popular in many countries, despite a lack of long-term safety data and limited clinical evidence for a role in smoking cessation. Indeed, in England, they have overtaken nicotine replacement therapy as a preferred product for cessation support. However, e-cigarettes have reached the market without evaluation of cessation efficacy and safety, bypassing the route required by regulatory authorities for pharmaceuticals that make therapeutic claims. Adequately powered clinical trials that evaluate the cessation efficacy potential of these products compared with current cessation treatments are needed; although the novel features and challenges of assessing this product group, such as wide diversity, rapid evolution and range of user behaviors, do not fit well within the standard clinical trial framework. This should be taken into account by regulators. Alternative designs that are pragmatic, accommodate user preferences, and include smoking reduction end-points may also be required. A more consistent approach to the regulation of products that deliver nicotine—one that does not favor tobacco—should be considered as part of a comprehensive nicotine regulatory model.","PeriodicalId":10446,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs","volume":"56 1","pages":"1 - 5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Issues in regulating E-cigarette clinical research\",\"authors\":\"C. Bullen, O. Knight-West\",\"doi\":\"10.3109/10601333.2014.976230\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract E-cigarettes have become popular in many countries, despite a lack of long-term safety data and limited clinical evidence for a role in smoking cessation. Indeed, in England, they have overtaken nicotine replacement therapy as a preferred product for cessation support. However, e-cigarettes have reached the market without evaluation of cessation efficacy and safety, bypassing the route required by regulatory authorities for pharmaceuticals that make therapeutic claims. Adequately powered clinical trials that evaluate the cessation efficacy potential of these products compared with current cessation treatments are needed; although the novel features and challenges of assessing this product group, such as wide diversity, rapid evolution and range of user behaviors, do not fit well within the standard clinical trial framework. This should be taken into account by regulators. Alternative designs that are pragmatic, accommodate user preferences, and include smoking reduction end-points may also be required. A more consistent approach to the regulation of products that deliver nicotine—one that does not favor tobacco—should be considered as part of a comprehensive nicotine regulatory model.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3109/10601333.2014.976230\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/10601333.2014.976230","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

尽管缺乏长期的安全性数据和有限的临床证据证明电子烟在戒烟中的作用,但电子烟在许多国家已经流行起来。事实上,在英国,它们已经取代尼古丁替代疗法,成为支持戒烟的首选产品。然而,电子烟在没有对戒烟效果和安全性进行评估的情况下进入市场,绕过了监管机构对做出治疗声明的药品所要求的途径。需要进行充分有力的临床试验,以评估这些产品与当前戒烟治疗相比的戒烟疗效潜力;尽管评估这一产品组的新特点和挑战,如广泛的多样性、快速的演变和用户行为的范围,并不适合标准的临床试验框架。监管机构应该考虑到这一点。可能还需要实用的、适应用户偏好的、包括减少吸烟终点的替代设计。一种更一致的方法来监管含有尼古丁的产品——一种不支持烟草的产品——应该被视为全面尼古丁监管模式的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Issues in regulating E-cigarette clinical research
Abstract E-cigarettes have become popular in many countries, despite a lack of long-term safety data and limited clinical evidence for a role in smoking cessation. Indeed, in England, they have overtaken nicotine replacement therapy as a preferred product for cessation support. However, e-cigarettes have reached the market without evaluation of cessation efficacy and safety, bypassing the route required by regulatory authorities for pharmaceuticals that make therapeutic claims. Adequately powered clinical trials that evaluate the cessation efficacy potential of these products compared with current cessation treatments are needed; although the novel features and challenges of assessing this product group, such as wide diversity, rapid evolution and range of user behaviors, do not fit well within the standard clinical trial framework. This should be taken into account by regulators. Alternative designs that are pragmatic, accommodate user preferences, and include smoking reduction end-points may also be required. A more consistent approach to the regulation of products that deliver nicotine—one that does not favor tobacco—should be considered as part of a comprehensive nicotine regulatory model.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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