Rethinking risk assessment for emerging technology first-in-human trials. Genske, A. & Engel-Glatter, S. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 19(1):125–139, 2016. 1![Rethinking risk assessment for emerging technology first-in-human trials [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex Recent progress in synthetic biology (SynBio) has enabled the development of novel therapeutic opportunities for the treatment of human disease. In the near future, first-in-human trials (FIH) will be indicated. FIH trials mark a key milestone in the translation of medical SynBio applications into clinical practice. Fostered by uncertainty of possible adverse events for trial participants, a variety of ethical concerns emerge with regards to SynBio FIH trials, including ‘risk’ minimization. These concerns are associated with any FIH trial, however, due to the novelty of the approach, they become more pronounced for medical applications of emerging technologies (emTech) like SynBio. To minimize potential harm for trial participants, scholars, guidelines, regulations and policy makers alike suggest using ‘risk assessment’ as evaluation tool for such trials. Conversely, in the context of emTech FIH trials, we believe it to be at least questionable to contextualize uncertainty of potential adverse events as ‘risk’ and apply traditional risk assessment methods. Hence, this issue needs to be discussed to enable alterations of the evaluation process before the translational phase of SynBio applications begins. In this paper, we will take the opportunity to start the debate and highlight how a misunderstanding of the concept of risk, and the possibilities and limitations of risk assessment, respectively, might impair decision-making by the relevant regulatory authorities and research ethics committees, and discuss possible solutions to tackle the issue. © 2015, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.
@article{genske_rethinking_2016,
title = {Rethinking risk assessment for emerging technology first-in-human trials},
volume = {19},
issn = {13867423},
url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84939218906&doi=10.1007%2fs11019-015-9660-7&partnerID=40&md5=0c69b756c4bfbb6e11e76d2fd079ed7f},
doi = {10.1007/s11019-015-9660-7},
abstract = {Recent progress in synthetic biology (SynBio) has enabled the development of novel therapeutic opportunities for the treatment of human disease. In the near future, first-in-human trials (FIH) will be indicated. FIH trials mark a key milestone in the translation of medical SynBio applications into clinical practice. Fostered by uncertainty of possible adverse events for trial participants, a variety of ethical concerns emerge with regards to SynBio FIH trials, including ‘risk’ minimization. These concerns are associated with any FIH trial, however, due to the novelty of the approach, they become more pronounced for medical applications of emerging technologies (emTech) like SynBio. To minimize potential harm for trial participants, scholars, guidelines, regulations and policy makers alike suggest using ‘risk assessment’ as evaluation tool for such trials. Conversely, in the context of emTech FIH trials, we believe it to be at least questionable to contextualize uncertainty of potential adverse events as ‘risk’ and apply traditional risk assessment methods. Hence, this issue needs to be discussed to enable alterations of the evaluation process before the translational phase of SynBio applications begins. In this paper, we will take the opportunity to start the debate and highlight how a misunderstanding of the concept of risk, and the possibilities and limitations of risk assessment, respectively, might impair decision-making by the relevant regulatory authorities and research ethics committees, and discuss possible solutions to tackle the issue. © 2015, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.},
language = {eng},
number = {1},
journal = {Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy},
author = {Genske, Anna and Engel-Glatter, Sabrina},
year = {2016},
note = {1},
keywords = {10 Ignorance, uncertainty and risk, Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Ignorance, incertitude et risque, PRINTED (Fonds papier), Uncertainty, clinical trial (topic), ethics, human, organization and management, risk assessment, synthetic biology},
pages = {125--139},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"5coojB7YTZMffcBrY","bibbaseid":"genske-engelglatter-rethinkingriskassessmentforemergingtechnologyfirstinhumantrials-2016","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2018-08-23T10:48:37.470Z","title":"Rethinking risk assessment for emerging technology first-in-human trials","author_short":["Genske, A.","Engel-Glatter, S."],"year":2016,"bibtype":"article","biburl":"http://bibbase.org/zotero-group/science_et_ignorance/1340424","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Rethinking risk assessment for emerging technology first-in-human trials","volume":"19","issn":"13867423","url":"https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84939218906&doi=10.1007%2fs11019-015-9660-7&partnerID=40&md5=0c69b756c4bfbb6e11e76d2fd079ed7f","doi":"10.1007/s11019-015-9660-7","abstract":"Recent progress in synthetic biology (SynBio) has enabled the development of novel therapeutic opportunities for the treatment of human disease. In the near future, first-in-human trials (FIH) will be indicated. FIH trials mark a key milestone in the translation of medical SynBio applications into clinical practice. Fostered by uncertainty of possible adverse events for trial participants, a variety of ethical concerns emerge with regards to SynBio FIH trials, including ‘risk’ minimization. These concerns are associated with any FIH trial, however, due to the novelty of the approach, they become more pronounced for medical applications of emerging technologies (emTech) like SynBio. To minimize potential harm for trial participants, scholars, guidelines, regulations and policy makers alike suggest using ‘risk assessment’ as evaluation tool for such trials. Conversely, in the context of emTech FIH trials, we believe it to be at least questionable to contextualize uncertainty of potential adverse events as ‘risk’ and apply traditional risk assessment methods. Hence, this issue needs to be discussed to enable alterations of the evaluation process before the translational phase of SynBio applications begins. In this paper, we will take the opportunity to start the debate and highlight how a misunderstanding of the concept of risk, and the possibilities and limitations of risk assessment, respectively, might impair decision-making by the relevant regulatory authorities and research ethics committees, and discuss possible solutions to tackle the issue. © 2015, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.","language":"eng","number":"1","journal":"Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Genske"],"firstnames":["Anna"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Engel-Glatter"],"firstnames":["Sabrina"],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2016","note":"1","keywords":"10 Ignorance, uncertainty and risk, Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Ignorance, incertitude et risque, PRINTED (Fonds papier), Uncertainty, clinical trial (topic), ethics, human, organization and management, risk assessment, synthetic biology","pages":"125–139","bibtex":"@article{genske_rethinking_2016,\n\ttitle = {Rethinking risk assessment for emerging technology first-in-human trials},\n\tvolume = {19},\n\tissn = {13867423},\n\turl = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84939218906&doi=10.1007%2fs11019-015-9660-7&partnerID=40&md5=0c69b756c4bfbb6e11e76d2fd079ed7f},\n\tdoi = {10.1007/s11019-015-9660-7},\n\tabstract = {Recent progress in synthetic biology (SynBio) has enabled the development of novel therapeutic opportunities for the treatment of human disease. In the near future, first-in-human trials (FIH) will be indicated. FIH trials mark a key milestone in the translation of medical SynBio applications into clinical practice. Fostered by uncertainty of possible adverse events for trial participants, a variety of ethical concerns emerge with regards to SynBio FIH trials, including ‘risk’ minimization. These concerns are associated with any FIH trial, however, due to the novelty of the approach, they become more pronounced for medical applications of emerging technologies (emTech) like SynBio. To minimize potential harm for trial participants, scholars, guidelines, regulations and policy makers alike suggest using ‘risk assessment’ as evaluation tool for such trials. Conversely, in the context of emTech FIH trials, we believe it to be at least questionable to contextualize uncertainty of potential adverse events as ‘risk’ and apply traditional risk assessment methods. Hence, this issue needs to be discussed to enable alterations of the evaluation process before the translational phase of SynBio applications begins. In this paper, we will take the opportunity to start the debate and highlight how a misunderstanding of the concept of risk, and the possibilities and limitations of risk assessment, respectively, might impair decision-making by the relevant regulatory authorities and research ethics committees, and discuss possible solutions to tackle the issue. © 2015, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.},\n\tlanguage = {eng},\n\tnumber = {1},\n\tjournal = {Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy},\n\tauthor = {Genske, Anna and Engel-Glatter, Sabrina},\n\tyear = {2016},\n\tnote = {1},\n\tkeywords = {10 Ignorance, uncertainty and risk, Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Ignorance, incertitude et risque, PRINTED (Fonds papier), Uncertainty, clinical trial (topic), ethics, human, organization and management, risk assessment, synthetic biology},\n\tpages = {125--139},\n}\n\n\n\n","author_short":["Genske, A.","Engel-Glatter, S."],"key":"genske_rethinking_2016","id":"genske_rethinking_2016","bibbaseid":"genske-engelglatter-rethinkingriskassessmentforemergingtechnologyfirstinhumantrials-2016","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84939218906&doi=10.1007%2fs11019-015-9660-7&partnerID=40&md5=0c69b756c4bfbb6e11e76d2fd079ed7f"},"keyword":["10 Ignorance","uncertainty and risk","Clinical Trials as Topic","Humans","Ignorance","incertitude et risque","PRINTED (Fonds papier)","Uncertainty","clinical trial (topic)","ethics","human","organization and management","risk assessment","synthetic biology"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"downloads":0},"search_terms":["rethinking","risk","assessment","emerging","technology","first","human","trials","genske","engel-glatter"],"keywords":["10 ignorance","uncertainty and risk","clinical trials as topic","humans","ignorance","incertitude et risque","printed (fonds papier)","uncertainty","clinical trial (topic)","ethics","human","organization and management","risk assessment","synthetic biology"],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["zX4acseCDM6D58AW7","NTvuMntpta5z9CAbT"]}