Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38350349›Full record

ArticleBiologicals : journal of the International Association of Biological Standardization2024

Ethical approval for controlled human infectious model clinical trial protocols - A workshop report.

Euzebiusz Jamrozik, Katherine Littler, Irina Meln, Wim Van Molle, Sandra Morel, Ole F Olesen, Michelle Rubbrecht, Shobana Balasingam, Pieter Neels

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biologicals : journal of the International Association of Biological Standardization, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Regulatory workshop on challenge strain development and GMP manufacture - A stakeholder meeting report.Biologicals : journal of the International Association of Biological Standardization · 2024
    Article
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

9 authors.

Euzebiusz JamrozikThe Ethox Centre & Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Katherine LittlerHealth Ethics and Governance Unit, Research for Health Department, Science Division, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Irina MelnEuropean Vaccine Initiative, Heidelberg, Germany.
Wim Van MolleSciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
Sandra MorelGlaxosmithkline (GSK), Rixensart, Belgium.
Ole F OlesenEuropean Vaccine Initiative, Heidelberg, Germany.
Michelle RubbrechtP95 Epidemiology & Pharmacovigilance, Leuven, Belgium.
Shobana BalasingamWellcome Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Pieter NeelsInternational Alliance for Biological Standardization (IABS), Lyon, France. Electronic address: pieter.neels@vaccine-advice.be.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Controlled Human Infectious Model studies (CHIM) involve deliberately exposing volunteers to pathogens. To discuss ethical issues related to CHIM, the European Vaccine Initiative and the International Alliance for Biological Standardization organised the workshop "Ethical Approval for CHIM Clinical Trial Protocols", which took place on May 30-31, 2023, in Brussels, Belgium. The event allowed CHIM researchers, regulators, ethics committee (EC) members, and ethicists to examine the ethical criteria for CHIM and the role(s) of CHIM in pharmaceutical development. The discussions led to several recommendations, including continued assurance that routine ethical requirements are met, assurance that participants are well-informed, and that preparation of study documents must be both ethically and scientifically sound from an early stage. Study applications must clearly state the rationale for the challenge compared to alternative study designs. ECs need to have clear guidance and procedures for evaluating social value and assessing third-party risks. Among other things, public trust in research requires minimisation of harm to healthy volunteers and third-party risk. Other important considerations include appropriate stakeholder engagement, public education, and access to health care for participants after the study.

Indexed as

Drug DevelopmentResearch DesignHealthy VolunteersHumansBioethicsClinical trialsControlled human infectionHuman challenge studiesResearch ethics

Identifiers

PMID38350349
PMCPMC11004724

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.