State Capacities in Innovation and Regulation in Regenerative Medicine in the United States of America
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14738/bjhmr.105.15311Keywords:
regenerative medicine, collective health, American regulation, innovation, uncertified clinics, advanced therapyAbstract
Regenerative medicine has transformed medical practices, focusing upon the repair and regeneration of cells, tissues and genes. However, there are still contradictions in regulation that require the development of new State capacities and public debates on collective health. The present article is innovative theoretically and empirically as it analyzes how these State capacities have developed in the USA, a world leader in the area. It describes the conflicts and lacunae involved in that process, as part of a wider comparative research project. Methodologically, it is based upon a qualitative bibliographical and documentary analysis of official documents and secondary data. It discusses the different phases of American Federal regulations on regenerative medicine, exemplifies with the role of a State-level research center and illustrates how the lack of adequate regulation has contributed to the growth of uncertified clinics, genetic diagnoses and therapies, often detrimental to collective health. The main findings of the paper are the existence of a lack of coordination and/or conflict between policies on regenerative medicine at the State and Federal levels, the challenges faced on the integration of the private industrial sector and on business models for the reimbursement of expenses to stakeholders, as well as, on ways of lowering the high prices of present therapies and simplifying bureaucratic procedures for their approval. It emphasizes future challenges in the area that will probably also affect Brazil.
References
McMahon, D, Thorsteinsdóttir H. Pursuing Endogenous High-Tech Innovation in Developing Countries: a look at regenerative medicine innovation in Brazil, China and India. Research Policy. 2013; 42:965-974.
Sipp, D, Sleeboom-Faulkner M. Downgrading of Regulation in Regenerative Medicine. Science. 2019;365(6454):644-646. doi: 10.1126/science. aax618
Kattel, R, Mazzucato M. Mission-oriented Innovation Policy and Dynamic Capabilities in The Public Sector. Ind Corp Change. 2018;27(5):787-801.
Torraco, R. Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Using the Past and Present to Explore the Future. Hum Resour Dev Rev. 2016;15(4):404-428.
Reisman, M, Adams K. Stem Cell Therapy: A Look at Current Research, Regulations, and Remaining Hurdles. P&T. 2014;39(12):846-847, 854-857.
Rao, M. The NIH and the Regenerative Medicine Field. Regenerative Medicine. 2012;7(2). Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.2217/rme.12.8. Access date: October 12, 2022.
American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy (ASGCT). Funding: Policy Updates Regenerative Medicine Gets Boost in Fiscal Year 2018 Omnibus Appropriations Package. 2018. Retrieved from: https://asgct.org/research/news/march-2018/nih-omnibus-spending-approved. Access date: June 5, 2020.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Regulation for Human, Cellular and Tissue Products (HCT/Ps) [72 FR 33667]. 2007. Retrieved from: www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS. Access date: November 15, 2022. st
Hogle O, Das A. The Social Production of Evidence: Regenerative Medicine and the 21 Century Cures Act. Regenerative Medicine. 2017;12(6):581-586. Retrieved from: https://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/full/10.2217/rme-2017-0058. Access date: January 18, 2022.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Regulatory Considerations for Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products: Minimal Manipulation and Homologous Use; Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff. 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.fda.gov/media/109176/download. Access date: January 20, 2022.
The Pew Charitable Trusts. FDA’s Framework for Regulating Regenerative Medicine Will Improve Oversight: Further Action Needed to Facilitate Development of Safe, Effective Treatments. 2019. Retrieved from: https://www.pewtrusts.org/-/media/assets/2019/10/fdasframeworkforregulatingregenerativemedicine_v2.pdf Access date: January 17, 2022.
Weissman, I., WATT, F. CIRM and UKRMP: Different Ways to Invest in Regenerative Medicine. Cell Stem Cell. 2016 Jul 7;19(1):19-22.
State of California. Constitutional Amendment. Text of Proposed Laws Proposition 71. 2004. p.147-175. Retrieved from: https://web.archive.org/web/20130522165854/http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/past/2004/gneral/propositions/prop71text.pdf. Access date: January 18, 2020.
State of California. Proposition 14, The California Stem Cell Research, Treatments, And Cures Initiative Of 2020, Office of the Attorney General, Amendment. 2020. Retrieved from: 127 https://www.oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/19-0022A1%20%28%28Stem%20Cell%20Research%29%29_0.pdf. Access date: January 18, 2020.
Trouson, A. California Institute for Regenerative Medicine: Accelerating Stem Cell Therapies in California and Beyond. Transnational Medicine. 2012;1(1):6–8. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.5966/sctm.2011-0047. Access date: October 16, 2022.
Frow, E. et al. Characterizing Direct-to-Consumer Stem Cell Businesses in the Southwest United States. Stem Cell Reports. 2019;13(1):1-7.
Turner, L, Knoepfler, P. Selling Stem Cells in the USA: Assessing the Direct-to-Consumer Industry. Cell Stem Cell. 2016;19(2):154-157. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2016.06.007.
Eisendel E.F., Adamson H. Stem Cell Tourism and Future Stem Cell Tourists: Policy and Ethical Implications. Developing World Bioethics. 2012;12(1):35-44.
Rivas L, et al. Unproven stem Cell Therapies: is it my Right to Try? Annuary Ist Super Sanità. 2019;55(2):179-185. doi: 10.4415/ANN_19_02_10.
Knoepfler, P. Mapping and Driving the Stem Cell Ecosystem. Regenerative Medicine. 2018;13(7). doi: 10.2217/rme-2018-0056. Retrieved from: https://www.futuremedicine.com/ doi/full/10.2217/rme-2018-0056. Access date: January 7, 2022.
Funk C., Hefferon, M. Public Views of Gene Editing for Babies Depend on How it Would Be Used. Pew Research Centre. 2018.
Harvard University. Chan School of Public Health. The Public and Genetic Editing, Testing and Therapy. Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health. 2016. Retrieved from: https://cdn1.sph.harvard.edu/wpcontent/uploads/sites/94/2016/01/STAT-Harvard-Poll-Jan-2016-Genetic-Technology.pdf. Access date: February 20, 2022.
McFarling, U. FDA moves to crack down on unproven stem cell therapies. STAT - Health. 2016. Retrieved from: https://www.statnews.com/2016/02/08/fda-crackdown-stem-cell-clinics/. Access date: December 28, 2021.
Hiltzig, M. U.S. judge rejects FDA bid to shut down stem cell clinics, dealing blow to regulators. Los Angeles Times, January8, 2020.
Sipp, D. et al. Marketing of unproven stem cell–based interventions: A call to action. Science Translational Medicine 9, eaag0426. 2017. Retrieved from: https://iris.unimore.it/retrieve/handle/11380/1222561/344405/sipp2017.pdf Access date: January 9,2022
International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR). A Closer Look at Stem Cell Treatments. 2018. Retrieved from: http://www.closerlookatstemcells.org Access date: January 12, 2022.
CMS, Centros de Serviços Medicare (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services). International: Centros de Serviço de Medicare e Medicaid Reincidem Política e Reabre Diálogo. Portal Saúde Business, February 27, 2007. Retrieved from: https://www.saudebusiness.com/mercado/internacional-centros-de-servio-demedicare-e-medicaid-reincidem-poltica-e-reabre-dilogo. Access date: February 24, 2022.
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (2015) Federal Register. 80, 210, 66845-66847. Published online October 30, 2015. Retrieved from: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2015/10/30/2015-27703/draftguidances-relating-to-the-regulation-of-human-cells-tissues-or-cellular-or-tissue-based. Access date July 30, Acero, L. (2023). State Capacities in Innovation and Regulation in Regenerative Medicine in the United States of America. British Journal of
National Institutes of Health (NIH) – National Human Genome Research Institute. Regulation of Genetic Tests. 2022. Retrieved from: https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/policy-issues/Regulation-of-Genetic-Tests. Access date: March 3, 2022.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Framework for Regulatory Oversight of Laboratory Developed Tests (LDTs): Draft Guidance for Industry, Food and Drug Administration Staff, and Clinical Laboratories. October 2014. Retrieved from: https://www.fda.gov/media/89841/download. Access date: January 7, 2022.
Genzen, J. et al. Laboratory-Developed Tests: A Legislative and Regulatory Review. Clinical Chemistry, 63(10), 1575–1584, 1 October 2017. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2017.275164. Access date: September 27, 2022.
Brewer, G.J. Orphan Drugs and Orphan Diseases: Clinical Realities and Public Policy. New York: Alan R. Lis, 1983.
UNITED STATES CONGRESS. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Health and the Environment of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, Ninety-Seventh Congress, Orphan Drugs, HR 1663, March 9, 1981. Washington: U.S. G.P.O.
Novas, C. Orphan Drugs, Patient Activism and Contemporary Healthcare. Quaderni, 68, 13-23. 2009.
Mountain, A. Gene therapy: the first decade. TIBTECH, 18:119-128. 2000.
Darnovsky, M. Warnings to Avoid Using CRISPR-Cas9 on Human Embryos Reinforced by New Findings. Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News. June 27, 2023.
Lawe T. Designer Babies: Examining the Ethics of Genetic Testing. Parentology. June 21, 2023.
Lisa, N.M. Human Germline Gene Editing from Maslahah Perspective: The Case of the World's First Gene Edited Babies. Bioethical Inquiry. 2021; 18:349-355. doi:10.1007/s11673-021-10101-7.
Genet S., et al. Gene Therapy Clinical Trials Worldwide to 2017: An update. The Journal of Gene Medicine. 2018;1-16. Retrieved from: http://www.wiley.co.uk/genmed/clinical. Access date: October 1, 2022.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. Guidance for Industry: Clinical Considerations for Therapeutic Cancer Vaccines. Maryland, USA; 2011 Oct. p. 1-16. Retrieved from: https://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/Vaccines/UCM278673.pdf. Access date: February 12, 2022.
Pryde D., Palmer M. Orphan Drugs and Rare Diseases. Royal Society of Chemistry Cambridge: Royal Society of Chemistry; 2014. doi: dhttps://doi.org/10.1039/9781782624202.
National Institutes of Health (NIH). Platform Vector Gene Therapy (PaVe-GT) Pilot Project. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Retrieved from: https://ncats.nih.gov/expertise/pave-gt-pilot-project. Access date: January 27, 2022.
National Institutes of Health (NIH). Accelerating Medicines Partnership (AMP). NIH RePORT Research Portfolio Reporting Tools – Funding Estimates of Funding for Various Research, Condition, and Disease Categories (RCDC). Retrieved from: https://report.nih.gov/funding/categorical-spending#/.https://www.nih.gov/research-training/accelerating-medicines-partnership-amp/bespoke-gene-therapyconsortium. Access date: December 18, 2021.
Elverum, K., Whitman, M. Delivering Cellular and Gene Therapies to Patients: Solutions for Realizing the Potential of The Next Generation of Medicine. Gene Therapy. 2020; 27:537–544. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41434-019-0074-7. Access date: October 24, 2022 129
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Liliana Acero
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
