Search

Data sharing is a precondition of precision medicine. Numerous organizations have produced abundant guidance on data sharing. Despite such efforts, data are not being shared to a degree that can trigger the expected data-driven revolution in precision medicine. We set out to explore why. Here we report the results of a comprehensive analysis of data-sharing guidelines issued over the past two decades by multiple organizations. We found that the guidelines overlap on a restricted set of policy themes. However, we observed substantial fragmentation in the policy landscape across specific organizations and data types. This may have contributed to the current stalemate in data sharing. To move toward a more efficient data-sharing ecosystem for precision medicine, policy makers should explore innovative ways to cope with central policy themes such as privacy, consent, and data quality; focus guidance on interoperability, attribution, and public engagement; and promote data-sharing policies that can be adapted to multiple data types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article talks about informed consent of the participants in medical research and the disclosure of clinical results to the participants. Topics discussed include the field of genomic research, the patients undergoing genome sequencing and seeking information on the incidental findings, and the concept of the disclosure of results being a right of the patients.

A new active substance called "dersimelagon" (MT-7117) is being tested as an alternative treatment option for Erythropoietic protoporphyria (EPP). At the moment, dersimelagon is being tested both in the US and in Europe in a phase III placebo-controlled RCT. However, given the availability of an already approved treatment option for EPP the use of a placebo arm is questionable from an ethics point of view. We analyze the issue and suggest that a noninferiority active-control trial without placebo is an ethically and scientifically more valid design to test the efficacy of dersimelagon as well as other EPP treatments., (© 2023. Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM).)

Drugs addressing unmet medical needs can change the lives of millions. Developing and validating new drugs can, however, take many years. To streamline the assessment of new drugs, regulatory agencies have long established shortened review pathways. Among these programs, Accelerated Approval (AA) has recently come under scrutiny due to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's decision to authorize Aducanumab, the first Alzheimer's disease drug. This decision attracted fierce criticism due to the allegedly insufficient evidence about the safety and efficacy of the drug. While considerable scholarly attention has been devoted to this case, the ethical aspects of the AA regulatory pathway have so far remained relatively unexplored. In this paper, we set out to fill this gap. We illustrate six conditions that should be met for AA to be ethically acceptable: moral solicitude, evidence, risk mitigation, impartiality, sustainability, and transparency. We discuss such conditions and suggest practical steps to implement them in regulatory and oversight processes. Taken together, our six conditions represent a benchmark for assessing the ethical validity of AA processes and decisions., (© 2023 The Authors. Bioethics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

On June 7, 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved aducanumab, a monoclonal amyloid targeting β-amyloid, for the treatment for Alzheimer's disease (AD). This decision was achieved through the Accelerated Approval Pathway and was essentially motivated by the evidence that aducanumab reduces brain amyloid plaques. This news is causing a heated debate in the scientific community. On the one hand, aducanumab is the first drug to be approved for the treatment of the disease since 2003 and is the first drug to act on the alleged pathophysiological mechanisms of AD. At the same time, the evidence of clinical benefit coming from two phase 3 clinical trials is contradictory and still inconclusive. The aim of the present editorial is to provide some points to consider that can help understand the peculiarities and implications of this approval and feed the scientific debate underway.