The coming into force of Directive 2001/20/EC represented a step forward in harmonising clinical trial regulation in European countries, guaranteeing a uniform protection of subjects participating in clinical research across Europe. However, it led to a disproportionate increase in the bureaucratization, and thus, it became evident that procedures needed to be simplified without detriment to patient’s safety. Thus, Regulation 536/2014, that repealed Directive 2001/20/EC, with the aim of decreasing the growing bureaucratization and stimulating clinical research in Europe, established simplified procedures, such as regulating a common procedure for authorising trials in Europe, the institution of strict assessment timelines, or the definition of new concepts, such as “low-intervention clinical trial”. The legal form of a Regulation allowed the norm to be directly applied to Member States without the need for transposition. By means of the new Royal Decree, the national legislation is adapted to make the application of the regulation feasible and it allows the development of the aspects that the Regulation leaves to national legislation. Both documents seek to stimulate clinical research with medicinal products to foster knowledge, facilitate transparency, and reinforce subjects’ safety. This will surely be the case, but with this revision, we will look at the novelties and key aspects that are most relevant to investigators and we will analyse the consequences for all parties involved in clinical research.
We aimed to assess the efficacy of biologic therapy in refractory non-Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Optic Neuritis (ON), a condition more infrequent, chronic and severe than MS ON. This was an open-label multicenter study of patients with non-MS ON refractory to systemic corticosteroids and at least one conventional immunosuppressive drug. The main outcomes were Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) and both Macular Thickness (MT) and Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer (RNFL) using Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT). These outcome variables were assessed at baseline, 1 week, and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after biologic therapy initiation. Remission was defined as the absence of ON symptoms and signs that lasted longer than 24 h, with or without an associated new lesion on magnetic resonance imaging with gadolinium contrast agents for at least 3 months. We studied 19 patients (11 women/8 men; mean age, 34.8 ± 13.9 years). The underlying diseases were Bechet’s disease (n = 5), neuromyelitis optica (n = 3), systemic lupus erythematosus (n = 2), sarcoidosis (n = 1), relapsing polychondritis (n = 1) and anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody -associated vasculitis (n = 1). It was idiopathic in 6 patients. The first biologic agent used in each patient was: adalimumab (n = 6), rituximab (n = 6), infliximab (n = 5) and tocilizumab (n = 2). A second immunosuppressive drug was simultaneously used in 11 patients: methotrexate (n = 11), azathioprine (n = 2), mycophenolate mofetil (n = 1) and hydroxychloroquine (n = 1). Improvement of the main outcomes was observed after 1 year of therapy when compared with baseline data: mean ± SD BCVA (0.8 ± 0.3 LogMAR vs. 0.6 ± 0.3 LogMAR; p = 0.03), mean ± SD RNFL (190.5 ± 175.4 μm vs. 183.4 ± 139.5 μm; p = 0.02), mean ± SD MT (270.7 ± 23.2 μm vs. 369.6 ± 137.4 μm; p = 0.03). Besides, the median (IQR) prednisone-dose was also reduced from 40 (10–61.5) mg/day at baseline to. 2.5 (0–5) mg/day after one year of follow-up; p = 0.001. After a mean ± SD follow-up of 35 months, 15 patients (78.9%) achieved ocular remission, and 2 (10.5%) experienced severe adverse events. Biologic therapy is effective in patients with refractory non-MS ON.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.