Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Clinical trial design issues raised during recombinant DNA advisory committee review of gene transfer protocols.

Gene transfer clinical trial protocols are reviewed by the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee (RAC). Identifying the design concerns and suggestions commonly raised during RAC review may help investigators and sponsors shorten the process of protocol development and improve the quality of gene transfer trials. We therefore examined 53 full public reviews of gene transfer clinical trial protocols performed by the RAC between December 2000 and June 2004 to determine what trial design concerns or suggestions RAC members raised during written review or public discussion or in the formal letter to investigators after the review was completed. We also determined how frequently these concerns were raised. We found that RAC members raised issues regarding selection of subjects in 89% of reviews, dose escalation in 77%, selection of safety end points in 76%, biological activity measures in 66%, and overall design in 60% of reviews. The most common issue raised by RAC reviewers was the need to exclude subjects at increased risk for adverse events. Furthermore, in 89% of reviews, at least one design issue pertaining to safety of participants was raised. In 91% of reviews, at least one design concern was presented as a written RAC recommendation or concern to the investigator after the public review. When submitting protocols for RAC review, investigators and sponsors might devote more attention to issues that RAC reviewers commonly raise. Such attention might help strengthen clinical trial protocols, shorten the protocol development process, and enhance the protection of research participants.

Clinical Protocols↗
PubMed1992

Debates, divisions, and decisions: recombinant DNA advisory committee (RAC) authorization of the first human gene transfer experiments.

Possibly the most far-reaching, controversial research currently being conducted in the international biological science community involves human gene therapy experimentation. In this paper, I report the dynamics of the political process which ultimately found the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee (RAC) of the National Institutes of Health approving for the first time protocols of this genre. A full appreciation of the policy-making dialogue shows that significant participants perceived the process from very different vantage points regarding the way in which the American political system works and the way in which it ought to work. I argue that, if we are to understand how the RAC should proceed in orchestrating a human gene therapy policy agenda, then we must flesh out and critically analyze these competing vantage points. To that end, I postulate seven possible "action models" for characterizing how protocol assessments of the type at issue might be developed given the nature of our politics, reaching the conclusion that one of these models holds out the most promise for synthesizing efficaciously the key factors involved. In conclusion, I discuss how the RAC might profitably employ this preferred strategy in these and other cases.

Advisory Committees↗