Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39896089›Full record

ArticleAsian bioethics review2025

Review Mechanisms for Advanced Medical Therapies in Japan and Thailand: A Proposal for the Use of Expert Clinical Benefit Assessments at Designated Institutions.

Kenji Matsui, Nipan Israsena, Jaranit Kaewkungwal, Pornpimon Adams, David Wendler, Reidar K Lie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asian bioethics review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. How to democratize cell and gene therapy: A global approach.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2025
    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

6 authors.

Kenji MatsuiDivision of Bioethics and Healthcare Law, Institute for Cancer Control, National Cancer Center Japan, Tsukiji 5-1-1, Chuo-Ku, Tokyo, 104-0045 Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-9390-2959
Nipan IsrasenaCenter of Excellence for Stem Cell and Cell Therapy, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, 8th Floor Bhumisiri Bld ., Rajdamir Rd, Lumpini, Pathumwan, Bangkok, 10330 Thailand.
Jaranit KaewkungwalDepartment of Tropical Hygiene, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, 420/6 Rachavithi Rd, Rachthewi, Bangkok, 10400 Thailand.ORCID 0000-0001-7916-8460
Pornpimon AdamsOffice of Research Services, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, 420/6 Rachavithi Rd, Rachthewi, Bangkok, 10400 Thailand.ORCID 0000-0001-6455-8132
David WendlerDepartment of Bioethics, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bldg. 10, Room 1C118, Bethesda, MD 20892-1156 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9359-4439
Reidar K LieDepartment of Philosophy, University of Bergen, Sydnesplassen 12, 5007 Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-5734-5777

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advanced new therapies, such as stem cell and gene therapies and xenotransplantation, represent challenges for regulatory and ethical review. Major drug agencies, such as in the U.S., India, and Europe, have asserted regulatory authority and require ethics review by local ethics review committees, using the same strict requirements as those for standard drug approvals. In spite of this, unapproved and undocumented stem cell clinics flourish in all of these places, suggesting that current approaches do not offer patients sufficient protection. Japan has attempted another approach, requiring approvals at local levels for all regenerative medical procedures, and a faster approval of promising new interventions. The Japanese approach has, however, also been criticized as not striking a proper balance between early access and a proper assessment of safety and effectiveness. For smaller and less-resourced countries, such as Thailand, one major challenge is limited expertise to conduct the evaluation of these advanced new therapies. This article provides an overview of the issues facing regulators and proposes that countries should restrict the early adoption of advanced new therapies to specialized clinics with appropriate scientific and ethical expertise for review. Review in these institutions should focus on expert clinical benefit assessments for individual patients being offered such interventions, independently of whether they are offered as research or therapy.

Indexed as

Advanced new therapiesRegenerative medicineScientific and ethics reviewStem cell regulation

Identifiers

PMID39896089
PMCPMC11785842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.