Fourth Controlled Human Infection Model (CHIM) meeting - CHIMs in endemic countries, May 22-23, 2023.

Earlier meetings laid the foundations for Controlled Human Infection Models (CHIMs), also known as human challenge studies and human infection studies, including Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) production of the challenge agent, CHIM ethics, environmental safety in CHIM, recruitment, community engagement, advertising and incentives, pre-existing immunity, and clinical, immunological, and microbiological endpoints. The fourth CHIM meeting focused on CHIM studies being conducted in endemic countries. Over the last ten years we have seen a vast expansion of the number of countries in Africa performing CHIM studies, as well as a growing number of different challenge organisms being used. Community and public engagement with assiduous ethical and regulatory oversight has been central to successful introductions and should be continued, in more community-led or community-driven models. Valuable initiatives for regulation of CHIMs have been undertaken but further capacity building remains essential.

North East England South Asia Mental health Alliance (NEESAMA): an exemplar of global north and global south collaboration to improve research, training and service delivery in mental healthcare.

Despite the worldwide burden of mental illness and recent interest in global approaches to address this, progress on increasing awareness, lessening stigma, reducing the treatment gap, and improving research and training in mental health has been slow. In 2018, the North East England South Asia Mental health Alliance (NEESAMA) was developed as a collaboration between high-income (global north) and low- to middle-income (global south) countries to address this slow progress. This paper outlines how the joint priority areas for research, training and service delivery were identified across the life course (child and adolescent, adults and older people) between partner organisations spanning Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and the UK. It describes the progress to date and proposes a way forward for similar alliances to be forged.

Regulatory challenges with biosimilars: an update from 20 countries.

The World Health Organization (WHO) issued guidelines for the regulatory evaluation of biosimilars in 2009 and has provided considerable effort toward helping member states implement the evaluation principles in the guidelines into their regulatory practices. Despite this effort, a recent WHO survey (conducted in 2019-2020) has revealed four main remaining challenges: unavailable/insufficient reference products in the country; lack of resources; problems with the quality of some biosimilars (and even more with noninnovator products); and difficulties with the practice of interchangeability and naming of biosimilars. The following have been identified as opportunities/solutions for regulatory authorities to deal with the existing challenges: (1) exchange of information on products with other regulatory authorities and accepting foreign licensed and sourced reference products, hence avoiding conducting unnecessary (duplicate) bridging studies; (2) use of a "reliance" concept and/or joint review for the assessment and approval of biosimilars; (3) review and reassessment of the products already approved before the establishment of a regulatory framework for biosimilar approval; and (4) setting appropriate regulatory oversight for good pharmacovigilance, which is essential for the identification of problems with products and establishing the safety and efficacy of interchangeability of biosimilars.

WHO implementation workshop on guidelines on procedures and data requirements for changes to approved biotherapeutic products, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 25-26 June 2019.

The first global workshop on implementation of the WHO guidelines on procedures and data requirements for changes to approved biotherapeutic products adopted by the WHO Expert Committee in 2018 was held in June 2019. The workshop participants recognized that the principles based on sound science and the potential for risk, as described in the WHO Guidelines on post-approval changes, which constitute the global standard for product life-cycle management are providing clarity and helping national regulatory authorities in establishing guidance while improving time-lines for an efficient regulation of products. Consequently, the regulatory situation for post-approval changes and guideline implementation is changing but there is a disparity between different countries. While the guidelines are gradually being implemented in some countries and also being considered in other countries, the need for regional workshops and further training on post-approval changes was a common theme reiterated by many participants. Given the complexities relating to post-approval changes in different regions/countries, there was a clear understanding among all participants that an efficient approach for product life-cycle management at a national level is needed to ensure faster availability of high standard, safe and efficacious medicines to patients as per the World Health Assembly Resolution 67.21.

Systematic review of tools to measure outcomes for young children with autism spectrum disorder.

BACKGROUND: The needs of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are complex and this is reflected in the number and diversity of outcomes assessed and measurement tools used to collect evidence about children's progress. Relevant outcomes include improvement in core ASD impairments, such as communication, social awareness, sensory sensitivities and repetitiveness; skills such as social functioning and play; participation outcomes such as social inclusion; and parent and family impact. OBJECTIVES: To examine the measurement properties of tools used to measure progress and outcomes in children with ASD up to the age of 6 years. To identify outcome areas regarded as important by people with ASD and parents. METHODS: The MeASURe (Measurement in Autism Spectrum disorder Under Review) research collaboration included ASD experts and review methodologists. We undertook systematic review of tools used in ASD early intervention and observational studies from 1992 to 2013; systematic review, using the COSMIN checklist (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments) of papers addressing the measurement properties of identified tools in children with ASD; and synthesis of evidence and gaps. The review design and process was informed throughout by consultation with stakeholders including parents, young people with ASD, clinicians and researchers. RESULTS: The conceptual framework developed for the review was drawn from the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, including the domains 'Impairments', 'Activity Level Indicators', 'Participation', and 'Family Measures'. In review 1, 10,154 papers were sifted - 3091 by full text - and data extracted from 184; in total, 131 tools were identified, excluding observational coding, study-specific measures and those not in English. In review 2, 2665 papers were sifted and data concerning measurement properties of 57 (43%) tools were extracted from 128 papers. Evidence for the measurement properties of the reviewed tools was combined with information about their accessibility and presentation. Twelve tools were identified as having the strongest supporting evidence, the majority measuring autism characteristics and problem behaviour. The patchy evidence and limited scope of outcomes measured mean these tools do not constitute a 'recommended battery' for use. In particular, there is little evidence that the identified tools would be good at detecting change in intervention studies. The obvious gaps in available outcome measurement include well-being and participation outcomes for children, and family quality-of-life outcomes, domains particularly valued by our informants (young people with ASD and parents). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first systematic review of the quality and appropriateness of tools designed to monitor progress and outcomes of young children with ASD. Although it was not possible to recommend fully robust tools at this stage, the review consolidates what is known about the field and will act as a benchmark for future developments. With input from parents and other stakeholders, recommendations are made about priority targets for research. FUTURE WORK: Priorities include development of a tool to measure child quality of life in ASD, and validation of a potential primary outcome tool for trials of early social communication intervention. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002223. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.