Development of thermosensitive hydrogel of Amphotericin-B and Lactoferrin combination-loaded PLGA-PEG-PEI nanoparticles for potential eradication of ocular fungal infections: In-vitro, ex-vivo and in-vivo studies.

The most prevalent conditions among ocular surgery and COVID-19 patients are fungal eye infections, which may cause inflammation and dry eye, and may cause ocular morbidity. Amphotericin-B eye drops are commonly used in the treatment of ocular fungal infections. Lactoferrin is an iron-binding glycoprotein with broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity and is used for the treatment of dry eye, conjunctivitis, and ocular inflammation. However, poor aqueous stability and excessive nasolacrimal duct draining impede these agens' efficiency. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of Amphotericin-B, as an antifungal against Candida albicans, Fusarium, and Aspergillus flavus, and Lactoferrin, as an anti-inflammatory and anti-dry eye, when co-loaded in triblock polymers PLGA-PEG-PEI nanoparticles embedded in P188-P407 ophthalmic thermosensitive gel. The nanoparticles were prepared by a double emulsion solvent evaporation method. The optimized formula showed particle size (177.0 ± 0.3 nm), poly-dispersity index (0.011 ± 0.01), zeta-potential (31.9 ± 0.3 mV), and entrapment% (90.9 ± 0.5) with improved ex-vivo pharmacokinetic parameters and ex-vivo trans-corneal penetrability, compared with drug solution. Confocal laser scanning revealed valuable penetration of fluoro-labeled nanoparticles. Irritation tests (Draize Test), Atomic force microscopy, cell culture and animal tests including histopathological analysis revealed superiority of the nanoparticles in reducing signs of inflammation and eradication of fungal infection in rabbits, without causing any damage to rabbit eyeballs. The nanoparticles exhibited favorable pharmacodynamic features with sustained release profile, and is neither cytotoxic nor irritating in-vitro or in-vivo. The developed formulation might provide a new and safe nanotechnology for treating eye problems, like inflammation and fungal infections.

Challenges faced by ethics committee members in India during COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed-methods exploration.

Background & objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic had a distinct impact on scientific research and Ethics Committees (ECs). We conducted a mixed-methods investigation to understand the issues faced and solutions identified by ECs during this pandemic in India. Methods: A quantitative online survey form (30 members) and qualitative in-depth interviews (10 members) from various ECs were conducted. Thematic content analysis for qualitative and proportion analysis for quantitative data was carried out. Results: During the online survey, an average difficulty score, which was measured using the Visual Analogue Scale, was 5.3 (SD 2.1). Pressure for expedited approvals was felt by EC members with a drastic increase in the number of submission of research projects. The scarcity of information on investigational products (IPs) and requisite consent process posed major hurdles. Ongoing non-COVID studies and post-graduate dissertations were badly hit due to the shift in attention towards COVID-related research. Non-familiarity with virtual technology and lack of face-to-face interactions were highlighted as demerits. However, a few of the EC members welcomed newer methods, being time-saving, convenient and reducing travel hassles. Site monitoring and severe adverse event-related analyses were also negatively impacted upon. Solutions included the alternate methods of consenting (virtual, abbreviated), a detailed explanation of the protocol and IPs and benefits versus risk assessment. Interpretation & conclusions: Despite various challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, the ECs in India steered well through the hurdles. Moreover, adapting a hybrid mode, technical training and updating guidelines were perceived as urgent by EC members.

Pandemic preparedness and responsiveness of research review committees: lessons from review of COVID-19 protocols at KEMRI Wellcome Trust Research Programme in Kenya.

Background: The scale of the COVID-19 pandemic and novelty of SARS-CoV-2 presented unprecedented challenges in the review of COVID-19 protocols. We investigated how research at the KEMRI Wellcome Trust Research Programme (KWTRP) was reviewed, including by institutional and national level committees. Methods: A document review and in-depth interviews with researchers, regulators and research reviewers were conducted. Documents reviewed included research logs of all protocols submitted between April-1-2020 and March-31-2021, feedback letters from review committees for 10 new COVID-19 protocols (n=42), and minutes from 35 COVID-19 research review meetings. Fifteen in-depth interviews were conducted with respondents purposively selected because of their experience of developing or reviewing COVID-19 protocols at the institution level (n=9 researchers, engagement officers and regulators) or their experience in reviewing proposals at a national-level (n=6 committee members). Data were managed and analyzed using MS Excel and NVivo12. Results: Between April-1-2020 and March-31-2021, 30 COVID-19-related submissions by KWTRP researchers were approved. Changes to the review system included strengthening the online system for protocol submission and review, recruiting more reviewers, and trialing a joint review process where one protocol was submitted to multiple review committees simultaneously . The turnaround time from submission to national approval/rejection over this period was faster than pre-pandemic, but slower than the national committee's target. COVID-19-specific ethics questions centred on: virtual informed consent and data collection; COVID-19 prevention, screening and testing procedures; and the challenges of study design and community engagement during the pandemic. Conclusions: The unprecedented challenges of the pandemic and added bureaucratic requirements created a more complex review process and delayed final approval of research protocols. The feasibility of conducting joint review of research during public health emergencies in Kenya needs further investigation. Consideration of the unique COVID-19 ethics issues raised in this paper might aid expedience in current and future reviews.

Willingness and motivations towards volunteering during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey among final year medical students in Lagos, Nigeria.

Introduction: Increasing manpower capacity to meet the demands in the healthcare system is important during health emergencies. Medical students have roles to play during a pandemic but their involvement in these duties should be voluntary. The objective of this study was to assess the willingness and motivations of final year medical students in Lagos, Nigeria towards volunteering during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among medical students in their sixth (final) year of study at the two public Universities in Lagos, Nigeria using total population sampling technique. A web-based questionnaire was used for data collection and data were analysed using SPSS. Logistic regression analysis was used to predict the willingness to volunteer. Results: The mean age of the respondents was 23.4 years ±â€¯2.6SD and 62.6% were female. About 65.9% of the medical students were willing to volunteer. Motivational factors which include self-rated good health status [OR: 2.1(95%CI: 1.16-3.6)], self-rated competence to work as a COVID-19 volunteer [OR: 6.5(95%CI: 3.61-11.54)] and availability of adequate protection and personal protective equipment [OR: 3.3(95%CI: 1.74-6.33)] significantly increased the odds of willingness to volunteer after controlling for other variables. Respondents' opinions on settings where medical students can serve as volunteers during the COVID-19 pandemic include case management (21.7%) and telemedicine (85.8%). Conclusion: Medical students are willing to volunteer during the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a need to prepare and motivate the final year medical students by developing their skills to improve their competence and by providing adequate protection for the willing students to function as volunteers.

Adherence with reporting of ethical standards in COVID-19 human studies: A rapid review

Background: Patients with COVID-19 may feel under pressure to participate in research during the pandemic. Safeguards to protect research participants include ethical guidelines [e.g. Declaration of Helsinki and good clinical practice (GCP)], legislation to protect participants' privacy, research ethics committees (RECs) and informed consent. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) advises researchers to document compliance with these safeguards. Adherence to publication guidelines has been suboptimal in other specialty fields. The aim of this rapid review was to determine whether COVID-19 human research publications report compliance with these ethical safeguards. Methods: A rapid systematic literature review was conducted in MEDLINE using the search term 'COVID-19'. The search was performed in April 2020 with no start date and repeated to include articles published in November 2020. Filters were 'Full free text available' and 'English Language'. Two reviewers assessed article title, s and full texts. Non-COVID-19 articles and non-clinical studies were excluded. Independent reviewers conducted a second assessment of a random 20% of articles. The outcomes included reporting of compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki and GCP, REC approval, informed consent and participant privacy. Results: The searches yielded 1275 and 1942 articles of which 247 and 717 were deemed eligible, from the April search and November respectively. The majority of journals had editorial policies which purported to comply with ICMJE ethical standards. Reporting of compliance with ethical guidelines was low across all study types but was higher in the November search for case series and observational studies. Reporting of informed consent for case studies and observational studies was higher in the November search, but similar for case series. Overall, participant confidentiality was maintained but some case studies included a combination of details which would have enabled participant identification. Reporting of REC approval was higher in the November search for observational studies. Conclusions: While the majority of journal's editorial policies purported to support the ethical safeguards, many COVID-19 clinical research publications identified in this rapid review lacked documentation of these important safeguards for research participants. In order to promote public trust, ethical declarations should be included consistently. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Analysis of the renewed European Medical Device Regulations in the frame of the non - EU regulatory landscape during the COVID facilitated change.

The term "Medical devices" includes technology-based devices or articles, both basic and complex. Due to these types of variations, a strict, robust, transparent, and sustainable regulatory framework is required. In recent clinical practice, incidents including the breast implant and the hip replacement crisis have made it necessary to improve the regulatory and compliance approaches for the industry to ensure the manufacturing and distribution of safe and innovative MDs within the EU. In response to this, the EU revised the laws governing medical devices and in vitro diagnostics to align with the developments of the sector, address critical safety issues and support innovation. The new regulation (EU) 2017/745 on Medical Devices (MDR) is now applicable from May 26 2021 and the In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Regulation (EU) 2017/746 will take effect from May 2022.In this review, we aim to provide an update on the new Medical Device Regulations in the context of the current medical needs of the world, and also to give a glimpse at the non-EU regulatory landscape. Finally, we take a look at the closed-system transfer devices (CSTD) and COVID facilitated changes promoting demand for continuous improvement and trends in the pharmaceutical and medical industry related areas.

Characterization of Factors Predicting a Favorable Opinion of Research Applications Submitted for an Ethical Review Process.

Introduction: In Spain, biomedical research applications must receive a positive ethical opinion from Research Ethics Committees (RECs) before being executed. There is limited information on how to optimize the ethical review process to reduce delays. This study was performed to characterize variables predicting favorable opinions at the first ethical review performed by a REC. Material and Methods: The study assessed all research applications revised by a REC in 2019-2020. Data was extracted from REC's database of La Rioja, Spain. Variables collected covered three areas: (i) principal investigator's profile; (ii) study design; and (iii) ethical review process. A model based on multiple logistic regression analysis was created to identify variables explaining favorable opinions in first rounds of ethical review processes. Results: The sample included 125 applications (41 submitted in 2019, and 84 in 2020). At the first review, nine (7%) applications were rejected, 56 (45%) were approved, and the remaining 60 (48%) required at least two reviews prior to approval. When comparing both years, a 2-fold increase in the number of applications submitted, and a difference in the ratio of applications with a favorable vs. non-favorable opinion were observed. Furthermore, a model predicted 71% of probability of obtaining a favorable opinion in the first ethical review. Three variables appeared as being explanatory: if the principal investigator is either the group leader or the department's head (OR = 17.39; p < 0.001), and if the informed consent (OR = 11.79; p = 0.01), and methods and procedures (OR = 34.15; p < 0.001) are well done. Conclusions: These findings confirm an increase in the number of submissions and a difference in the ratio of applications approved by year. Findings observed also confirm deficiencies in "informed consent" and in "methods and procedures" are the two main causes of delay for favorable ethical opinions. Additionally, findings highlight the need that group leaders and heads of departments should be more involved in guiding and supervising their research teams, especially when research applications are led by less experienced researchers. Based on these findings, it is suggested that an adequate mentoring and targeted training in research could derive in more robust research applications and in smoother ethical review processes.

Egyptian perspectives on potential risk of paracetamol/acetaminophen-induced toxicities: Lessons learnt during COVID-19 pandemic.

Paracetamol/Acetaminophen was widely used as a first-line antipyretic and analgesic for COVID-19 patients without giving any attention to the potential risk of related toxicities. A survey was conducted on 176 Egyptians using an online survey portal to assess their knowledge, and attitude regarding potential risk of paracetamol toxicities and whether COVID-19 pandemic affected their practices regarding safe use of paracetamol. The self-administered questionnaire was developed by the researchers and was validated by expert opinions. A pilot testing of the questionnaire was done. Alpha Cronbach test used to assess the internal consistency reliability of the survey revealed good reliability. Overall percent-score revealed that only 24.4% of participants had good knowledge about paracetamol and its related potential toxicities. 62.5% of participants considered paracetamol safer than other medications of the same indications. 42.6% of participants could advise others to use paracetamol without prescription. According to the participants' responses, physicians were less concerned to give instructions about possibility of overdosage. Our results also revealed that participants' administration of paracetamol without physician prescription was more during COVID-19. Practice of paracetamol administration more than the allowed number of tablets/day was significantly more evident during the pandemic. We concluded that the unsupervised use of paracetamol is an alarming sign that should be addressed as this could lead to a high rate of accidental paracetamol toxicity. A lesson learnt from COVID-19 pandemic is the need to implement behavior change measures to mitigate the risk of accidental paracetamol toxicity.

The Social Data Foundation model: Facilitating health and social care transformation through datatrust services

Turning the wealth of health and social data into insights to promote better public health, while enabling more effective personalized care, is critically important for society. In particular, social determinants of health have a significant impact on individual health, well-being, and inequalities in health. However, concerns around accessing and processing such sensitive data, and linking different datasets, involve significant challenges, not least to demonstrate trustworthiness to all stakeholders. Emerging datatrust services provide an opportunity to address key barriers to health and social care data linkage schemes, specifically a loss of control experienced by data providers, including the difficulty to maintain a remote reidentification risk over time, and the challenge of establishing and maintaining a social license. Datatrust services are a sociotechnical evolution that advances databases and data management systems, and brings together stakeholder-sensitive data governance mechanisms with data services to create a trusted research environment. In this article, we explore the requirements for datatrust services, a proposed implementation—the Social Data Foundation, and an illustrative test case. Moving forward, such an approach would help incentivize, accelerate, and join up the sharing of regulated data, and the use of generated outputs safely amongst stakeholders, including healthcare providers, social care providers, researchers, public health authorities, and citizens.

Ethical Challenges in Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia Vaccine as Well as New Drug Research and Development

To review systematically the progress of all domestic and foreign clinical trials since the emergence of the COVID-19 epidemic and the overview of human challenge study (HCS) in the past year, grasp relevant information of ethical review, and explores the feasibility of human challenge study and provide references for stake holders. Based on the Chinese Clinical Trial Registration Center and clinical trial. gov, clinical trials that were consistent with COVID-19 was searched, and the deadline was June 11, 2020.Basic information was extracted and the number of trials was selected from the research type, clinical stage, recruitment status, and ethical passing status. Literature search was conducted based on Pubmed between January 1, 2019 and June 11, 2020.According to the included literature, basic information was extracted and opinions were reported on HCS. 638 and 1935 clinical trials were carried out at home and abroad respectively, of which the number of clinical trials carried out in Hubei reached 323. China and the United States conducted more interventional trials, and the United States had the most clinical trials entered in Phase II, there were a total of 142. Most of the clinical trials were in the stage of recruiting research subjects. In addition, a total of 539 clinical trials in China had passed ethical approval. A total of 5 documents were included in the Human Challenge Study, four maintained a positive attitude towards HCS and put forward corresponding thinking about ethical review. Under the COVID-19, clinical trials for new drugs and new coronavirus vaccines have rapidly increased, which puts forward higher requirements for the progress of ethical review. In the face of such public health emergencies and special research, it is urgent to establish a sound ethical review system and an ethical review system, as well as to construct an ethical model for special research. © 2021, Editorial Board of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology. All right reserved.

Assessment of studies based on the use of questionnaires in the time of Covid-19 pandemic.

During the covid-19 pandemic a huge number of research projects have been promoted internationally, nationally and locally. This also happened in Italy which was the first affected European country. Among these studies, research protocols based on the use of online questionnaires to evaluate the reaction of health workers and researchers to the emergency situation and their state of well-being were promoted. This contribution focuses on research protocols based on the use of online questionnaires and presents as a case study three different research proposals with the purpose of showing their different degree of compliance to scientific and ethical requirements and the need for a clear regulation. A guideline for the assessment of studies based on questionnaires is then suggested, in the absence of a national regulation on the issue. Having established rules, albeit flexible, can help to guarantee transparency in the evaluation process and contribute to the scientific and ethical compliance of the research.

Festina lente.

The provisions adopted in Italy for clinical trials on medicinal products and medical devices for the epidemiological emergency caused by COVID-19 had an impact also on the functioning of Ethics Committees (ECs). All COVID-19 clinical trials are evaluated preliminarily by the Technical Scientific Committee of the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA). They are then evaluated by the Clinical Trial Office of the Competent Authority (AIFA) and by the EC of the Lazzaro Spallanzani National Institute for Infectious Diseases. On the basis of this experience, several parties have recommended the adoption of a new structure that envisages the involvement of a single EC for the activation of new studies, similar to the system put in place for studies on COVID-19. Rather than a single EC with jurisdiction over the entire country, we could envisage the accreditation of a certain number of ECs, possibly subdivided by therapeutic fields, with the trials to be evaluated distributed among them, so that each is authorised to issue an opinion that is valid nationally.

Assessment of an electronic system for research ethics committees document management: An observational study.

Since 1 January 2020, the Central Research Ethics Committee of the Health Ministry implemented PRIISA.BA, an in-house developed electronic system for online submission of health research applications to the 63 public and private research ethics committees (RECs) of Buenos Aires City, Argentina. This study though to compare the times to first review and the time to approval among applications submitted prior to PRIISA.BA and thereafter, across public RECs. All public RECs of the city were invited to participate. Overall, 453 applications from 10 RECs (242 pre- and 211 post-PRIISA.BA) were available for the analyses. There was a decrease in the time to first review and an increase in the time to approval after PRIISA.BA implementation. The increase in time to approval was transient and limited to the first three months. The results were consistent with analyses limited to non-COVID applications. Our results show an increase in the times to approval after the implementation of an electronic system for online submission of health research applications that, although transient, was significant. These data could be relevant to other RECs implementing this technology since it emphasizes the need of monitoring potential unnecessary delays in reviews during the critical initial period.

Getting Real: The Maryland Healthcare Ethics Committee Network's COVID-19 Working Group Debriefs Lessons Learned.

Responding to a major pandemic and planning for allocation of scarce resources (ASR) under crisis standards of care requires coordination and cooperation across federal, state and local governments in tandem with the larger societal infrastructure. Maryland remains one of the few states with no state-endorsed ASR plan, despite having a plan published in 2017 that was informed by public forums across the state. In this article, we review strengths and weaknesses of Maryland's response to COVID-19 and the role of the Maryland Healthcare Ethics Committee Network (MHECN) in bridging gaps in the state's response to prepare health care facilities for potential implementation of ASR plans. Identified "lessons learned" include: Deliberative Democracy Provided a Strong Foundation for Maryland's ASR Framework; Community Consensus is Informative, Not Normative; Hearing Community Voices Has Inherent Value; Lack of Transparency & Political Leadership Gaps Generate a Fragmented Response; Pandemic Politics Requires Diplomacy & Persistence; Strong Leadership is Needed to Avoid Implementing ASR … And to Plan for ASR; An Effective Pandemic Response Requires Coordination and Information-Sharing Beyond the Acute Care Hospital; and The Ability to Correct Course is Crucial: Reconsidering No-visitor Policies.

Ethical considerations of the dynamics of clinical trials in an epidemic context: Studies on COVID-19.

The COVID-19 epidemic has led to the intense mobilization of all health professionals, including those involved in research. From the very beginning, research ethics committees (RECs) have been called upon and mobilized to carry out the scientific and ethical evaluations of research projects to achieve a sound analysis of their risk/benefit balance. The aim of this article is to present an ethical reflection on the challenges and consequences of the fast-track procedure for the evaluation of COVID-19 research projects in the context of a public health emergency. Indeed, a large number of protocols of reduced rigor were hastily prepared without collaboration between researchers and in the absence of national regulation. As a result, a number of ethical dilemmas have emerged concerning the opposing needs of pragmatism imposed by the emergency context and the ethical principles that should govern the conduct of research. Moreover, the dispersion of these individual projects, aggravated by excessive media coverage of specific treatments, has resulted in a weakened impact of the research in the epidemic context. This article provides suggestions for the ethical management of ongoing and upcoming research, giving RECs the opportunity to adapt their evaluations to avoid allowing the pragmatism of the emergency context to subvert the inviolability of the epistemological and ethical principles of research on humans. This reflection may strengthen the ethical basis for the formulation of their decisions.

Ethical considerations and interdisciplinary approach to research on COVID-19 pandemic: The response of Iran University of Medical Sciences.

Background: Research ethics committees are comprised of policymakers, supervisors, and decision-makers and aim at increasing adherence to professional ethics standards in conducting health-related research. The existential philosophy of these committees is to preserve the patients' health, maintain and promote public trust in health care providers, protect the rights of both patients and health care providers, and promote organizational ethics. However, this task can be complex and challenging during a public health emergency. Research ethics committees set the standard of research in the emergency situations through defining which research has the potential to promote the quality of response to a public health emergency. Methods: This study aims at collecting and classifying the valuable experiences of the research ethics committee members and reviewers during the early days of the COVID-19 epidemic in Iran University of Medical Sciences, one of the major universities in Tehran. It provides a basic understanding of the key concepts and challenges in reviewing and approving research by research ethics committees and the recommendations to overcome these challenging issues. Results: To accelerate the review process of COVID-19 research proposals, the scientific, methodological and ethical review panel was integrated as a large committee called 'IUMS Corona Research Team'. The first meeting was held on March 7, two weeks after the official announcement of the first case of the disease and is continued once a week. A total of 130 projects have been discussed and evaluated in this committee, among which 83 proposals were approved after modification. Conclusion: An interdisciplinary approach supports a flexible and effective scientific and ethical review of research leading to more protection of research subjects as well as promotion in the treatment and management of the pandemic ahead.

Ethics committee meetings - Online or face to face?

Ethics committee meetings are held periodically, with all members being physically present in the meeting room. During the COVID-19 pandemic, and the lockdown, a number of committees have resorted to the use of videoconferencing. Online meetings have significant advantages over physical or face-to-face meetings, though the guidelines and regulations imply that online meetings should not be the norm. Considering the advantages of online meetings in terms of saving time and costs, can the regulations and guidelines be tweaked to allow them even after the lockdown is over?