Com Ciência e Com Respeito: episódio 10

Neste episódio, continuamos conversando sobre o que mudou, com a pandemia, na metodologia das pesquisas, e porque essas mudanças foram importantes para que os direitos dos participantes de pesquisa continuassem a ser protegidos.

Reducing Events of Noncompliance in Neurology Human Subjects Research: the Effect of Human Subjects Research Protection Training and Site Initiation Visits.

In an effort to minimize protocol noncompliance in neurological research studies that can potentially compromise patient safety, delay completion of the study, and result in premature termination and added costs, we determined the effect of investigator trainings and site initiation visits (SIVs) on the occurrence of noncompliance events. Results of protocol audits conducted at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke from 2003 to 2019 on 97 research protocols were retrospectively analyzed. Based on the depth of auditing and provision of investigator research training, audit data were separated into four arms: 1) Early Period, 2003 to 2012; 2) Middle Period, 2013 to 2016; and Late Period, 2017 to 2019, further divided into 3) Late Period without SIVs; and 4) Late Period with SIVs. Events of noncompliance were classified by the type of protocol deviation, the category, and the cause. In total, 952 events occurred across 1080 participants. Protocols audited during the Middle Period, compared to the Early Period, showed a decrease in the percentage of protocols with at least 1 noncompliance event. Protocols with SIVs had a further decrease in major, minor, procedural, eligibility, and policy events. Additionally, protocols audited during the Early Period had on average 0.46 major deviations per participant, compared to 0.26 events in protocols audited during the Middle Period, and 0.08 events in protocols audited during the Late Period with SIVs. Protocol deviations and noncompliance events in neurological clinical trials can be reduced by targeted investigator trainings and SIVs. These measures have major impacts on the integrity, safety, and effectiveness of human subjects research in neurology.

Ethics in field experimentation: A call to establish new standards to protect the public from unwanted manipulation and real harms.

In 1966, Henry Beecher published his foundational paper "Ethics and Clinical Research," bringing to light unethical experiments that were routinely being conducted by leading universities and government agencies. A common theme was the lack of voluntary consent. Research regulations surrounding laboratory experiments flourished after his work. More than half a century later, we seek to follow in his footsteps and identify a new domain of risk to the public: certain types of field experiments. The nature of experimental research has changed greatly since the Belmont Report. Due in part to technological advances including social media, experimenters now target and affect whole societies, releasing interventions into a living public, often without sufficient review or controls. A large number of social science field experiments do not reflect compliance with current ethical and legal requirements that govern research with human participants. Real-world interventions are being conducted without consent or notice to the public they affect. Follow-ups and debriefing are routinely not being undertaken with the populations that experimenters injure. Importantly, even when ethical research guidelines are followed, researchers are following principles developed for experiments in controlled settings, with little assessment or protection for the wider societies within which individuals are embedded. We strive to improve the ethics of future work by advocating the creation of new norms, illustrating classes of field experiments where scholars do not appear to have recognized the ways such research circumvents ethical standards by putting people, including those outside the manipulated group, into harm's way.

Establishment of a Controlled Human Infection Model with a Lyophilized Strain of Shigella sonnei 53G.

Controlled human infection models (CHIMs) are useful for vaccine development. To improve on existing models, we developed a CHIM using a lyophilized preparation of Shigella sonnei strain 53G produced using current good manufacturing practice (cGMP). Healthy adults were enrolled in an open-label dose-ranging study. Following administration of a dose of rehydrated S. sonnei strain 53G, subjects were monitored for development of disease. The first cohort received 500 CFU of 53G, and dosing of subsequent cohorts was based on results from the previous cohort. Subjects were administered ciprofloxacin on day 5 and discharged home on day 8. Subjects returned as outpatients for clinical checks and sample collection. Attack rates increased as the dose of S. sonnei was increased. Among those receiving the highest dose (1,760 CFU), 70% developed moderate to severe diarrhea, 50% had dysentery, and 40% had fever. Antilipopolysaccharide responses were observed across all cohorts. An S. sonnei CHIM using a lyophilized lot of strain 53G was established. A dose in the range of 1,500 to 2,000 CFU of 53G was selected as the dose for future challenge studies using this product. This model will enable direct comparison of study results between institutions and ensure better consistency over time in the challenge inoculum.IMPORTANCE Controlled human infection models (CHIMs) are invaluable tools utilized to understand the human response to infection, potentially leading to protective immune mechanisms and allowing efficacy testing of enteric countermeasures, including vaccines, antibiotics, and other products. The development of an improved Shigella CHIM for both Shigella sonnei and Shigella flexneri is consistent with international efforts, supported by international donors and the World Health Organization, focused on standardizing Shigella CHIMs and using them to accelerate Shigella vaccine development. The use of lyophilized Shigella challenge strains rather than plate-grown inoculum preparations is considered an important step forward in the standardization process. Furthermore, the results of studies such as this justify the development of lyophilized preparations for additional epidemiologically important S. flexneri serotypes, including S. flexneri 3a and S. flexneri 6.

Institutional Review Board Quality, Private Equity, and Promoting Ethical Human Subjects Research.

Evaluating the quality and effectiveness of the institutional review boards (IRBs) responsible for overseeing research involving human participants is critically important but perpetually challenging. Seemingly common-sense measures, such as the number of proposals approved with and without major modifications and the number of unexpected adverse events occurring in approved protocols, can be misleading indicators of participant protection, and regulatory compliance may not correspond to achieving ethical goals. These measurement challenges make it difficult to assess the validity of concerns about different IRB models. A group of U.S. senators recently raised questions about the increasing use of for-profit IRBs to review research proposals (as opposed to boards typically housed at academic medical centers and health care institutions) and, more specifically, about the growing trend of private equity ownership and consolidation of for-profit IRBs. Although all IRBs face pressure to speed reviews and none are entirely free of conflicts of interest, the private equity model is particularly susceptible to approaches that could undercut the ethical mission of IRBs to protect and promote the rights and welfare of research participants. Ideally, the quality of board oversight could be measured directly, rather than relying on the heuristic of board type; this article describes several current efforts toward this goal. In the meantime, one improvement may be to pursue a new model of IRB oversight: independent nonprofit boards that stand apart from research institutions, take advantage of business approaches to research review, and minimize conflicts of interest.

The New 2019 Institutional Review Board Common Rule Update: Implications for Plastic Surgery Research.

Clinical research remains at the forefront of academic practice and evidence-based medicine. Unfortunately, history has shown that human subjects are vulnerable to experimentation without regard for their own dignity and informed decision-making. Subsequently, it is vital for research institutes to uphold safeguards and ethical conscientiousness toward human subjects. The establishment of federal regulations and the development of institutional review boards have set guidance on these processes. On January 21, 2019, final revisions to the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects (the "Common Rule") went into effect. The purpose of this article is to review changes to the Common Rule and discuss their impact on plastic surgery research.

Age-Related Differences in the Evaluation of a Virtual Health Agent's Appearance and Embodiment in a Health-Related Interaction: Experimental Lab Study.

BACKGROUND: Assistive technologies have become more important owing to the aging population, especially when they foster healthy behaviors. Because of their natural interface, virtual agents are promising assistants for people in need of support. To engage people during an interaction with these technologies, such assistants need to match the users´ needs and preferences, especially with regard to social outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Prior research has already determined the importance of an agent's appearance in a human-agent interaction. As seniors can particularly benefit from the use of virtual agents to maintain their autonomy, it is important to investigate their special needs. However, there are almost no studies focusing on age-related differences with regard to appearance effects. METHODS: A 2×4 between-subjects design was used to investigate the age-related differences of appearance effects in a human-agent interaction. In this study, 46 seniors and 84 students interacted in a health scenario with a virtual agent, whose appearance varied (cartoon-stylized humanoid agent, cartoon-stylized machine-like agent, more realistic humanoid agent, and nonembodied agent [voice only]). After the interaction, participants reported on the evaluation of the agent, usage intention, perceived presence of the agent, bonding toward the agent, and overall evaluation of the interaction. RESULTS: The findings suggested that seniors evaluated the agent more positively (liked the agent more and evaluated it as more realistic, attractive, and sociable) and showed more bonding toward the agent regardless of the appearance than did students. In addition, interaction effects were found. Seniors reported the highest usage intention for the cartoon-stylized humanoid agent, whereas students reported the lowest usage intention for this agent. The same pattern was found for participant bonding with the agent. Seniors showed more bonding when interacting with the cartoon-stylized humanoid agent or voice only agent, whereas students showed the least bonding when interacting with the cartoon-stylized humanoid agent. CONCLUSIONS: In health-related interactions, target group-related differences exist with regard to a virtual assistant's appearance. When elderly individuals are the target group, a humanoid virtual assistant might trigger specific social responses and be evaluated more positively at least in short-term interactions.

The Declaration of Helsinki on Medical Research involving Human Subjects: A Review of Seventh Revision.

The pinnacle of success achieved by the medical science and the benefits accrued to the patients have become possible through the medical research where human participants in the research are exposed to hazards inherent to the experiments. To protect the human subjects and to maintain high ethical standards, the World Medical Association has adopted "The Declaration of Helsinki" in 1964. After two years of consultation with the experts throughout the world, the seventh revision of the Declaration was adopted on 19th October 2013 in Brazil. The aim of this article is to review the seventh revision of the Declaration of Helsinki in relation to medical research involving human subjects and highlight the amendments made in the latest revision which are relevant to clinical research in human subjects. The latest revision has made four substantial changes on the existing Declaration, whch include dealing with the compensation of the trial-related injuries, approval of use of placebos in the clinical trials, protection of vulnerable groups and the post-trial provisions. The implications of these amendments in the clinical research are highlighted. Keywords: Consent; Declaration of Helsinki; ethics; experimental medicine; research; seventh revision.

Towards Identifying an Upper Limit of Risk: A Persistent Area of Controversy in Research Ethics.

Whether there is an upper limit of net risk that volunteers can consent to in research, and what that limit happens to be, has been the subject of persistent controversy in research ethics. This article defends the concept of an upper limit of risk in research against recent critics and supports the most promising approach for identifying this limit, that of finding comparator activities that are generally accepted in society and pose high levels of risk. However, high-risk activities that have been proposed as relevant comparators involve more certain benefits and confer considerable social esteem to those who take on the risks. This suggests that developing a robust approach to identifying social value, whether by developing a procedural safeguard or a systematic framework, could more effectively identify research with sufficient social value to justify high net risk. Additionally, the social status of research participants should be elevated to be more on par with others who laudably take on high risk for the benefit of others. By attending to the benefits necessary for the justification of high-risk research, the level of allowable risk will no longer be so controversial.

Minimizing Risks Is Not Enough: The Relevance of Benefits to Protecting Research Participants.

Forty years ago, the Belmont Report counseled that a "systematic, nonarbitrary analysis of risks and benefits" is vital to ensuring the ethical appropriateness of research with human subjects. Since then, research ethics has devoted considerable attention to the first half of this advice, emphasizing the ethical importance of assessing and minimizing the risks of research with human subjects. Significantly less attention has been devoted to a systematic assessment of the potential benefits of research participation. To the extent that benefits for individual participants are considered at all, commentators tend to focus on their potential to undermine the goal of minimizing risks. A chance for clinical benefit may obscure the fact that research poses risks not present in clinical care, while an offer of financial compensation or ancillary care may induce individuals to accept risks that conflict with their long-term interests. This article argues that, while undoubtedly important, minimizing risks fails to offer sufficient protection for research participants, especially those who cannot consent, because it neither ensures that the risks of research are justified nor protects participants from exploitation. Belmont's advice to develop systematic and nonarbitrary ways to ensure that research participants receive appropriate benefits needs to be heeded as well.

Informed Consent, Therapeutic Misconception, and Unrealistic Optimism.

The Belmont Report attested to the cardinal importance of informed consent for ethical research on human subjects. Important challenges to securing informed consent have emerged since its publication more than 40 years ago. Among some of the most significant of these challenges are those that highlight social psychological factors that have the potential to impair the appreciation of relevant information disclosed in the informed consent process. Responding to these challenges requires us to think harder about the content of the principle of informed consent and the demands that it imposes on investigators. This article focuses on two challenges in particular, that presented by the so-called therapeutic misconception, and that presented by the psychological bias of unrealistic optimism. After outlining an account of the principle of informed consent as it applies to the research context, the article briefly reviews the empirical literature on the therapeutic misconception and the bias of unrealistic optimism. It then relates these phenomena to the principle of informed consent, paying special attention to the ethical demands they impose on investigators. The article concludes by considering how recent trends to integrate research and clinical care affect the main points it has advanced.

International Clinical Research and Justice in the Belmont Report.

The Belmont Report was written by a US Commission charged by the US Congress to advise on research supported by the US government. Its focus was understandably domestic. In the 40 years since its publication, clinical research has become increasingly international. Many clinical trials have sites in multiple countries, and many of the host countries are relatively impoverished. Such research raises some distinctive ethical issues. This paper outlines some of the key ethical challenges that have been raised by clinical research conducted in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and sponsored by high-income country (HIC) institutions. It then considers whether the Belmont Report has the resources to address these problems and argues that it does not. The article closes by noting some parallels between this international research and domestic US research, which suggest that the US might benefit from the discussions abroad.

From Moving Beyond Compliance to Quality to Moving Beyond Quality to Effectiveness: Realities and Challenges.

In 2007, Taylor proposed to move beyond compliance to develop measures for assessing the ethical quality of institutional review board (IRB) reviews. To date, no such tool has been developed. In 2018, Lynch et al. proposed to move beyond quality to advance effective research ethics oversight. Instead of providing a set of measures, they proposed to define and specify ways to measure the effectiveness of IRBs in protecting human subjects. They further claimed that any attempts to measure the quality and performance of IRBs without using such measures, to be developed by them in the unforeseeable future, were not helpful. The realities are that nearly 50 years after its establishment, there has been no systematic assessment of the quality and performance of IRBs, and that nearly two decades after the deaths of Jesse Gelsinger and Ellen Roche and the implementation of reform processes to improve our system of protecting human subjects, there is still plenty of room for improvement. The challenges today are for Taylor to come up with a tool to measure the ethical quality of IRB reviews, for Lynch et al. to develop measures for assessing the effectiveness of IRBs in protecting human subjects, and for the IRB community to decide whether to continue to wait for Taylor and Lynch et al. to develop their promised tools or to start taking advantage of performance measurements to improve the quality and performance of IRBs by using existing IRB performance metrics or to improve those existing performance metrics.