Impact of genetically modified organism requirements on gene therapy development in the EU, Japan, and the US

Tajima, Gentaro; Huh, Seoan; Schmidt, Natalie Anne; Macdonald, Judith; Fleischmann, Tobias T.; Wonnacott, Keith Merrell

doi:10.1016/j.omtm.2022.05.012

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 8 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…rAAV gene therapy leverages a bioengineered adeno-associated virus (AAV) capsid that is classified as a genetically modified organism in some countries (e.g., United States, European Union, Japan). 19 In addition to the National Institutes of Health Guidelines for handling gene therapy, 20 some institutions have developed their own policies for research handling of gene therapies. [21][22][23] In some cases, it may be necessary to obtain Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC) approval for the use of genetically modified organisms.…”

Section: Biosafety Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delivery of gene therapy in haemophilia treatment centres in the United States: Practical aspects of preparedness and implementation

Pipe,

Douglas,

Hwang

et al. 2023

Haemophilia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionHaemophilia treatment centres (HTCs) and healthcare providers (HCPs) will need to adapt to a new treatment paradigm with the emergence of adeno‐associated virus (AAV)‐based gene therapy for the treatment of haemophilia in adults.AimThis review examines the upcoming patient and institutional journeys, along with practical aspects of preparedness for clinical delivery of gene therapy by HTCs.MethodsBased on our clinical experience and examination of published literature, we explored the parallel journeys for patients and treatment centres to navigate before, during, and after administration of gene therapy.ResultsThe patient journey includes: information gathering; decision making; comprehensive patient assessment; preparation for the infusion itself; short‐ and long‐term monitoring; lifestyle modifications; and the possible need for immunosuppressive treatment. Informed decision‐making may require patient education with extensive discussions and an understanding that not all people with haemophilia will choose or be eligible for gene therapy, although eligibility criteria continue to evolve. The institutional journey includes: consideration of biosafety procedures; planning for product procurement, handling, storage, and administration; development of detailed protocols and guidance documents; contingency planning for immunosuppressive and haemostatic management; consideration of clinical capabilities and staff training needs; coordination of efforts by the full multidisciplinary team; and collaboration between referring, dosing, and follow‐up treatment centres. Documented protocols and guidance documents are pivotal for this complex therapy to ensure safe handling, optimal delivery, and post‐infusion management and follow‐up.ConclusionSuccessful implementation of this new treatment modality will require communication and collaboration among multiple stakeholders.

show abstract

Section: Biosafety Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%