Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32851596›Full record

ArticleDaru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences2020

COVID-19 vaccines: ethical framework concerning human challenge studies.

Daniela Calina, Thomas Hartung, Anca Oana Docea, Demetrios A Spandidos, Alex M Egorov, Michael I Shtilman, Felix Carvalho, Aristidis Tsatsakis

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Ethical Frameworks for Conducting Social Challenge Studies.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Case for Human Challenge Trials in COVID-19.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2022
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Observational
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 6 countries.

Daniela CalinaDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, 200349, Craiova, Romania. calinadaniela@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1523-9116
Thomas HartungCAAT-Europe at the University of Konstanz, 78457, Constance, Germany.
Anca Oana DoceaDepartment of Toxicology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, 200349, Craiova, Romania.
Demetrios A SpandidosLaboratory of Clinical Virology, Medical School, University of Crete, 71409, Heraklion, Greece.
Alex M EgorovFSBSI "Chumakov Federal Scientific Center for Research and Development of Immune- and Biological Products of Russian Academy of Sciences", 108819, Moscow, Russia.
Michael I ShtilmanD.I. Mendeleyev University of Chemical Technology, 125047, Moscow, Russia.
Felix CarvalhoUCIBIO, REQUIMTE, Laboratory of Toxicology, Department of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto, 4050-313, Porto, Portugal.
Aristidis TsatsakisRussian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia. tsatsaka@uoc.gr.
Russian Academy of Sciences · RUUniversity of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova · ROD. Mendeleyev University of Chemical Technology of Russia · RUJohns Hopkins University · USUniversidade do Porto · PTUniversity of Crete · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe pandemic associated with the new SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus continues to spread worldwide. The most favorable epidemic control scenario, which provides long-term protection against COVID-19 outbreak, is the development and distribution of an effective and safe vaccine. The need to develop a new COVID-19 vaccine is pressing; however, it is likely to take a long time, possibly several years. This is due to the time required to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the proposed vaccine. and the time required to manufacture and distribute millions of doses.

objectivesTo accelerate this development and associated safety testing, the deliberate infection of healthy volunteers has been suggested. The purpose of this short communication is to describe the ethical aspects of this type of testing,

resultsDeliberate infection of volunteers with a dangerous virus such as SARS-CoV-2 was initially considered unethical by researchers; but the current pandemic is so different from previous ones that these studies are considered ethical if certain criteria are met. Participants in human challenge studies must be relatively young, in good health and must receive the highest quality medical care, with frequent monitoring. Tests should also be performed with great caution and specialized medical supervision. Besides, the fact that obtaining vaccines faster through deliberate infection studies of healthy people has greater benefits than risks, has been demonstrated by obtaining other vaccines in other historical pandemics such as: smallpox, influenza, malaria, typhoid fever, Dengue fever and Zika.

conclusionsOne possibility to shorten the time required for the development of COVID-19 vaccines is to reduce clinical phases II and III by using human challenge studies through eliberate infection of healthy volunteers with SARS-CoV-2 after administration of the candidate vaccine. Accelerating the development of a COVID-19 vaccine even for a few weeks or months would have a great beneficial impact on public health by saving many lives.

Indexed as

AnimalsClinical Trials as TopicCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHuman ExperimentationHumansSARS-CoV-2Time FactorsCOVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19 vaccinesHuman challenge studiesRandomized clinical trialsRisk taking

Identifiers

PMID32851596
PMCPMC7449865
OpenAlexW3080462241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.