Need for greater post-trial support for clinical trial participants assessing high-risk, irreversible treatments.

There are increasing numbers of clinical trials assessing high-risk, irreversible treatments. Trial participants should only expect knowledge gain to society, no personal therapeutic benefit. However, participation may lead to long-term harms and prevent future therapeutic options. While some discussion has occurred around post-trial access to treatments for participants who received therapeutic benefit, there are no post-trial support requirements for those suffering long-term consequences from trial participation. Participants may be left with significant medical, psychological, social, technical or financial needs. All trials will end at some point, regardless of their success. Subsequently, they should be designed to take into account the post-trial period including the impact on the ongoing health of a participant and their post-trial needs.

Ethical and regulatory issues of stem cell-derived 3-dimensional organoid and tissue therapy for personalised regenerative medicine.

BACKGROUND: Regenerative medicine has the potential to treat genetic disorders and replace damaged or missing tissue. The use of donor or animal tissue raises many well-known issues, including limited tissue availability, the possibility of rejection and patient infection. Stem cell therapy raised hope of overcoming these issues, but created new risks including tumour formation and limited benefit if the desired target tissue does not form. The recent development of 3-dimensional tissues, including organoids, allows the creation of more complex tissues for personalised regenerative medicine. METHODS: This article details the potential health risks of 3-dimensional organoid and tissue therapy versus dissociated stem cell therapy. The current ethical and regulatory issues surrounding 3-dimensional organoid and tissue therapy are presented with a focus on the highly influential FDA and International Society of Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: The potential use of 3-dimensional organoid and tissue therapy may deliver greater patient benefits than other regenerative medicine approaches, but raises new health and ethical risks. Preclinical testing of these therapies will not mitigate some of their risks; they may only be understood after first-in-human trials. The potential irreversibility and high risk of these therapies affects how clinical trials should be structured, including post-trial care for participants.

Restoring vision using optogenetics without being blind to the risks.

Retinit is pigmentosa is an incurable degenerative disease that causes loss of light-sensitive cells in the retina and leads to severe vision impairment. The development of optogenetics has created great hype around its potential to treat retinitis pigmentosa by the introduction of light-sensitive proteins into other neural cells in the retina. The first-in-human studies of optogenetic treatment for this disease have recently been reported (NCT02556736 and NCT03326336). The treatment involves irreversible gene therapy and requires access to specially designed goggles to deliver light to the treated eye. These highly innovative and high-profile clinical trials raise numerous ethical issues that must be addressed during the early phases of research and clinical testing to ensure trial participants are treated fairly and can provide appropriate informed consent.

Invasive experimental brain surgery for dementia: Ethical shifts in clinical research practices?

The increasing dementia prevalence worldwide is driving the testing of novel therapeutic approaches, such as invasive brain technologies, despite limited clinical evidence and the risk of accelerating cognitive decline. Our manuscript (a) reviews the NIH Clinicaltrials.gov database for deep brain stimulation, stem cell implantation, and gene therapy trials on people with dementia; (b) discusses issues on beneficence, nonmaleficence, and autonomy associated with these trials; and (c) proposes nine recommendations that build on elements from the Declaration of Helsinki. We found 49 preregistered high-risk trials from nine countries planning to or involving 11,801 people with Alzheimer's or Lewy body dementia or dementia secondary to Parkinson's or Huntington's disease. Most of the people with Alzheimer's who are in these trials are from North America and East Asia. There is substantial heterogeneity in the enrolment criteria, even for trials recruiting only those with Alzheimer's disease. Although most trials enrol people in mild to moderate stages of Alzheimer's disease, trials in China enrol people who have severe Alzheimer's. Our findings highlight a pressing need to review and refine the enrolment criteria for invasive neural trials in people with dementia, considering risks, potential benefits, and capacity for informed consent. As a multidisciplinary team from Australia, the USA, Canada, and Germany with expertise in neurology, neuroscience, and ethics, we examine how it is essential to balance the risks of invasive neural research in a vulnerable population with limited capacity to provide informed consent to help advance the body of knowledge regarding a disease with limited therapeutic options.

Incoming ethical issues for deep brain stimulation: when long-term treatment leads to a 'new form of the disease'.

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been regarded as an efficient and safe treatment for Parkinson's disease (PD) since being approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1997. It is estimated that more than 150 000 patients have been implanted, with a forecasted rapid increase in uptake with population ageing. Recent longitudinal follow-up studies have reported a significant increase in postoperative survival rates of patients with PD implanted with DBS as compared with those not implanted with DBS. Although DBS tends to increase life expectancy for most patients with PD, this medical benefit does not come without attendant negative consequences. For example, emerging forms of iatrogenic harms are sometimes induced-harms which were not initially expected when clinicians proposed neurosurgery and patients or their guardians consented to the treatment. We report and discuss the clinical case of a patient who was implanted with DBS more than 20 years ago (at the time of writing) and is now experiencing unexpected stages of PD. This case illustrates how extending the life span without improving quality of life may introduce a burden of harms for patients and families. As well, this case shows why we should prepare for the expanding numbers of PD-implanted patients experiencing a gain of longevity but with severe stages of disease leading to diminution in quality of life. This newly observed effect of DBS treatment requires us to explore ethical questions related to iatrogenic harms, informed consent, end of life and caregivers' burden.

Ethical examination of deep brain stimulation's 'last resort' status.

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) interventions are novel devices being investigated for the management of severe treatment-resistant psychiatric illnesses. These interventions require the invasive implantation of high-frequency neurostimulatory probes intracranially aiming to provide symptom relief in treatment-resistant disorders including obsessive-compulsive disorder and anorexia nervosa. In the scientific literature, these neurostimulatory interventions are commonly described as reversible and to be used as a last resort option for psychiatric patients. However, the 'last resort' status of these interventions is rarely expanded upon. Contrastingly, usages of DBS devices for neurological symptoms (eg, Parkinson's disease, epilepsy or dystonia) have paved the way for established safety and efficacy standards when used earlier in a disease's timeline. As DBS treatments for these neurological diseases progress to have earlier indications, there is a parallel ethical concern that early implementation may one day become prescribed for psychiatric illnesses. The purpose of this article is to build off contemporary understandings of reversible neurostimulatory interventions to examine and provide clarifications on the 'last resort' status of DBS to better address its ethically charged use in psychiatric neurosurgery. To do this, evaluative differences between DBS treatments will be discussed to demonstrate how patient autonomy would be a paramount guiding principle when one day implementing these devices at various points along a psychiatric disease's timeline. In presenting the clarification of 'last resort' status, the ethical tensions of early DBS interventions will be better understood to assist in providing psychiatric patients with more quality of life years in line with their values.

Enthusiastic portrayal of 3D bioprinting in the media: Ethical side effects.

There has been a surge in mass media reports extolling the potential for using three-dimensional printing of biomaterials (3D bioprinting) to treat a wide range of clinical conditions. Given that mass media is recognized as one of the most important sources of health and medical information for the general public, especially prospective patients, we report and discuss the ethical consequences of coverage of 3D bioprinting in the media. First, we illustrate how positive mass media narratives of a similar biofabricated technology, namely the Macchiarini scaffold tracheas, which was involved in lethal experimental human trials, influenced potential patient perceptions. Second, we report and analyze the positively biased and enthusiastic portrayal of 3D bioprinting in mass media. Third, we examine the lack of regulation and absence of discussion about risks associated with bioprinting technology. Fourth, we explore how media misunderstanding is dangerously misleading the narrative about the technology.

Print Me an Organ? Ethical and Regulatory Issues Emerging from 3D Bioprinting in Medicine.

Recent developments of three-dimensional printing of biomaterials (3D bioprinting) in medicine have been portrayed as demonstrating the potential to transform some medical treatments, including providing new responses to organ damage or organ failure. However, beyond the hype and before 3D bioprinted organs are ready to be transplanted into humans, several important ethical concerns and regulatory questions need to be addressed. This article starts by raising general ethical concerns associated with the use of bioprinting in medicine, then it focuses on more particular ethical issues related to experimental testing on humans, and the lack of current international regulatory directives to guide these experiments. Accordingly, this article (1) considers whether there is a limit as to what should be bioprinted in medicine; (2) examines key risks of significant harm associated with testing 3D bioprinting for humans; (3) investigates the clinical trial paradigm used to test 3D bioprinting; (4) analyses ethical questions of irreversibility, loss of treatment opportunity and replicability; (5) explores the current lack of a specific framework for the regulation and testing of 3D bioprinting treatments.

The Effects of Closed-Loop Brain Implants on Autonomy and Deliberation: What are the Risks of Being Kept in the Loop?

Neuroethics Now welcomes articles addressing the ethical application of neuroscience in research and patient care, as well as its impact on society.

Reforming primary healthcare: from public policy to organizational change.

PURPOSE: Governments everywhere are implementing reform to improve primary care. However, the existence of a high degree of professional autonomy makes large-scale change difficult to achieve. The purpose of this paper is to elucidate the change dynamics and the involvement of professionals in a primary healthcare reform initiative carried out in the Canadian province of Quebec. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: An empirical approach was used to investigate change processes from the inception of a public policy to the execution of changes in professional practices. The data were analysed from a multi-level, combined contextualist-processual perspective. Results are based on a longitudinal multiple-case study of five family medicine groups, which was informed by over 100 interviews, questionnaires, and documentary analysis. FINDINGS: The results illustrate the multiple processes observed with the introduction of planned large-scale change in primary care services. The analysis of change content revealed that similar post-change states concealed variations between groups in the scale of their respective changes. The analysis also demonstrated more precisely how change evolved through the introduction of "intermediate change" and how cycles of prescribed and emergent mechanisms distinctively drove change process and change content, from the emergence of the public policy to the change in primary care service delivery. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: This research was conducted among a limited number of early policy adopters. However, given the international interest in turning to the medical profession to improve primary care, the results offer avenues for both policy development and implementation. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The findings offer practical insights for those studying and managing large-scale transformations. They provide a better understanding of how deliberate reforms coexist with professional autonomy through an intertwining of change content and processes. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This research is one of few studies to examine a primary care reform from emergence to implementation using a longitudinal multi-level design.

Prognostic implication of preoperative behavior changes in patients with primary high-grade meningiomas.

High-grade meningiomas are rare extra-axial tumors, frequently causing brain invasion and prominent brain edema. Patients harboring high-grade meningiomas occasionally present with behavior changes. Data about frequency and prognostic importance of preoperative behavior changes in patients with high-grade meningiomas is missing. 86 patients with primary high-grade meningiomas were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed to determine correlation of preoperative behavior changes with tumor location, preoperative brain edema, tumor cleavability, tumor grade, Ki67 proliferation index, and microscopic brain invasion. Survival analysis was performed. 30 (34.9%) patients presented with preoperative behavior changes. These changes were more frequent with male patients (P = 0.066) and patients older than 55 years (P = 0.018). They correlated with frontal location (P = 0.013), tumor size (P = 0.023), microscopic brain invasion (P = 0.015), and brain edema (P = 0.006). Preoperative behavior changes did not correlate with duration of symptoms, tumor cleavability, tumor malignancy grade, and Ki67 proliferation index. They were not significantly related to overall survival or recurrence-free survival of patients with primary high-grade meningiomas. Preoperative behavior changes are frequent in patients harboring primary high-grade meningiomas. They correlate with tumor size, microscopic brain invasion, and brain edema. Preoperative behavior changes do not predict prognosis in patients with primary high-grade meningiomas.

Defining Biomarkers in Stem Cell-Derived Tissue Constructs for Drug and Disease Screening.

The development of stem cell-derived tissue constructs (SCTCs) for clinical applications, including regenerative medicine, drug and disease screening offers significant hope for detecting and treating intractable disorders. SCTCs display a variety of biomarkers that can be used to understand biological mechanisms, assess drug interactions, and predict disease. Although SCTCs can be derived from patients and share the same genetic make-up, they are nevertheless distinct from human patients in many significant ways, which can undermine the clinical significance of measurements in SCTCs. This study defines biomarkers, how they apply to SCTCs, and clarifies specific ethical issues associated with the use of SCTCs for drug and disease screening.

Definition of Implanted Neurological Device Abandonment: A Systematic Review and Consensus Statement.

Importance: Establishing a formal definition for neurological device abandonment has the potential to reduce or to prevent the occurrence of this abandonment. Objective: To perform a systematic review of the literature and develop an expert consensus definition for neurological device abandonment. Evidence Review: After a Royal Society Summit on Neural Interfaces (September 13-14, 2023), a systematic English language review using PubMed was undertaken to investigate extant definitions of neurological device abandonment. Articles were reviewed for relevance to neurological device abandonment in the setting of deep brain, vagal nerve, and spinal cord stimulation. This review was followed by the convening of an expert consensus group of physicians, scientists, ethicists, and stakeholders. The group summarized findings, added subject matter experience, and applied relevant ethics concepts to propose a current operational definition of neurological device abandonment. Data collection, study, and consensus development were done between September 13, 2023, and February 1, 2024. Findings: The PubMed search revealed 734 total articles, and after review, 7 articles were found to address neurological device abandonment. The expert consensus group addressed findings as germane to neurological device abandonment and added personal experience and additional relevant peer-reviewed articles, addressed stakeholders' respective responsibilities, and operationally defined abandonment in the context of implantable neurotechnological devices. The group further addressed whether clinical trial failure or shelving of devices would constitute or be associated with abandonment as defined. Referential to these domains and dimensions, the group proposed a standardized definition for abandonment of active implantable neurotechnological devices. Conclusions and Relevance: This study's consensus statement suggests that the definition for neurological device abandonment should entail failure to provide fundamental aspects of patient consent; fulfill reasonable responsibility for medical, technical, or financial support prior to the end of the device's labeled lifetime; and address any or all immediate needs that may result in safety concerns or device ineffectiveness and that the definition of abandonment associated with the failure of a research trial should be contingent on specific circumstances.

How I became myself after merging with a computer: Does human-machine symbiosis raise human rights issues?

Novel usages of brain stimulation combined with artificially intelligent (AI) systems promise to address a large range of diseases. These new conjoined technologies, such as brain-computer interfaces (BCI), are increasingly used in experimental and clinical settings to predict and alleviate symptoms of various neurological and psychiatric disorders. Due to their reliance on AI algorithms for feature extraction and classification, these BCI systems enable a novel, unprecedented, and direct connection between human cognition and artificial information processing. In this paper, we present the results of a study that investigates the phenomenology of human-machine symbiosis during a first-in-human experimental BCI trial designed to predict epileptic seizures. We employed qualitative semi-structured interviews to collect user experience data from a participant over a six-years period. We report on a clinical case where a specific embodied phenomenology emerged: namely, after BCI implantation, the patient reported experiences of increased agential capacity and continuity; and after device explantation, the patient reported persistent traumatic harms linked to agential discontinuity. To our knowledge, this is the first reported clinical case of a patient experiencing persistent agential discontinuity due to BCI explantation and potential evidence of an infringement on patient right, where the implanted person was robbed of her de novo agential capacities when the device was removed.

First Organoid Intelligence (OI) workshop to form an OI community.

The brain is arguably the most powerful computation system known. It is extremely efficient in processing large amounts of information and can discern signals from noise, adapt, and filter faulty information all while running on only 20 watts of power. The human brain's processing efficiency, progressive learning, and plasticity are unmatched by any computer system. Recent advances in stem cell technology have elevated the field of cell culture to higher levels of complexity, such as the development of three-dimensional (3D) brain organoids that recapitulate human brain functionality better than traditional monolayer cell systems. Organoid Intelligence (OI) aims to harness the innate biological capabilities of brain organoids for biocomputing and synthetic intelligence by interfacing them with computer technology. With the latest strides in stem cell technology, bioengineering, and machine learning, we can explore the ability of brain organoids to compute, and store given information (input), execute a task (output), and study how this affects the structural and functional connections in the organoids themselves. Furthermore, understanding how learning generates and changes patterns of connectivity in organoids can shed light on the early stages of cognition in the human brain. Investigating and understanding these concepts is an enormous, multidisciplinary endeavor that necessitates the engagement of both the scientific community and the public. Thus, on Feb 22-24 of 2022, the Johns Hopkins University held the first Organoid Intelligence Workshop to form an OI Community and to lay out the groundwork for the establishment of OI as a new scientific discipline. The potential of OI to revolutionize computing, neurological research, and drug development was discussed, along with a vision and roadmap for its development over the coming decade.

The burden of normality: from 'chronically ill' to 'symptom free'. New ethical challenges for deep brain stimulation postoperative treatment.

Although an invasive medical intervention, Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) has been regarded as an efficient and safe treatment of Parkinson's disease for the last 20 years. In terms of clinical ethics, it is worth asking whether the use of DBS may have unanticipated negative effects similar to those associated with other types of psychosurgery. Clinical studies of epileptic patients who have undergone an anterior temporal lobectomy have identified a range of side effects and complications in a number of domains: psychological, behavioural, affective and social. In many cases, patients express difficulty adjusting from being chronically ill to their new status as 'treated' or 'seizure free'. This postoperative response adjustment has been described in the literature on epilepsy as the 'Burden of Normality' (BoN) syndrome. Most of the discussion about DBS postoperative changes to self is focused on abnormal side effects caused by the intervention (ie, hypersexuality, hypomania, etc). By contrast, relatively little attention is paid to the idea that successfully 'treated' individuals might experience difficulties in adjusting to becoming 'normal'. The purpose of this paper is (1) to articulate the postoperative DBS psychosocial adjustment process in terms of the BoN syndrome, (2) to address whether the BoN syndrome illustrates that DBS treatment poses a threat to the patient's identity, and (3) to examine whether the current framework for rehabilitation after DBS procedures should be updated and take into account the BoN syndrome as a postoperative self-change response.

Investigating the feasibility and ethical implications of phenotypic screening using stem cell-derived tissue models to detect and manage disease.

Stem-cell-derived tissue models generated from sick people are being used to understand human development and disease, drug development, and drug screening. However, it is possible to detect disease phenotypes before a patient displays symptoms, allowing for their use as a disease screening tool. This raises numerous issues, some of which can be addressed using similar approaches from genetic screenings, while others are unique. One issue is the relationship between disease disposition, biomarker detection, and patient symptoms and how tissue models could be used to define disease. Other issues include decisions of when to screen, what diseases to screen for, and what treatment options should be offered.

N-of-1 Trials for Closed-Loop Deep Brain Stimulation Devices.

Closed-loop deep brain stimulation (DBS) devices hold great promise for treating various neurological and psychiatric conditions. Yet while these algorithmic-based devices provide personalized treatment to each patient, they also present uniquely individualized risks of physiological and psychological harms. These experimental devices are typically tested in randomized controlled trials, which may not be the optimum approach to identifying and assessing phenomenological harms they pose to patients. In this article, we contend that an N-of-1 trial design-which is being used ever more frequently to realize the goals of individualized, precision medicine-could provide beneficial phenomenological data about the potential risks of harm to properly inform the use of closed-loop DBS devices. Data from N-of-1 trials may provide patients, as well as their families and other caregivers, with better information on which to base informed choices about pursuing this type of treatment option.