Testing Meldonium: Assessing Soviet pragmatic alternatives to the randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Background/aims Current research largely tends to ignore the drug-testing model that was developed in the “Second World” as an explicit alternative to the randomized controlled trial. This system can be described as “socialist pharmapolitics,” accounting for the specific features of state socialism that influenced the development and testing of experimental drugs. The clinical trials model employed in the “Second World” was heavily influenced by the Soviet Union, which was by far the most influential player in the socialist bloc during the Cold War. Based on extensive archival research, this article presents an empirical case of a late Soviet clinical trial as a pragmatic alternative to the randomized controlled trial model. It accounts for the divergences between the official model prescribed by the Soviet authorities and the messy realities of healthcare practice. It further outlines different factors that ultimately shaped how clinical trials were organized in Soviet institutions “on the ground.” Accordingly, this article presents a “real-life” history of “socialist pharmapolitics” and outlines the problems that this system faced in practice. Methods Archival research was conducted at the Russian State Archive of Scientific and Technical Documentation in Moscow. Archival files include scientific, technical, and registration documentation such as biochemical, pharmacological, and clinical descriptions of the experimental drug Meldonium, letters between various hospitals, research institutes and the Soviet regulatory body, as well as 26 reports of completed clinical trials. Manual content analysis was used for the interpretation of results. Results This article presents an empirical case of a late Soviet clinical trial as a pragmatic alternative to the randomized controlled trial model. It demonstrates some key differences from the randomized controlled trial model. This article also highlights some of the discrepancies between the model that was officially prescribed by the Soviet authorities and the realities of experimental drug testing in the Soviet Union in the late 1980s and early 1990s. In particular, it notes some elements of randomization, double-blinding, and the use of placebo that were present in Meldonium trials despite being formally denounced by Soviet bioethics. Conclusion The Soviet model for testing experimental drugs differed from the Western one substantially in a number of respects. This difference was not only proclaimed officially by the Soviet authorities, but was for the most part enforced in clinical trials in practice. At the same time, our research demonstrates that there were important differences between the official model and the clinical realities on the ground.

Unlocking the Potential of Meldonium: From Performance Enhancement to Therapeutic Insights

“…With Latvia's entry into the European Union, it became necessary to conduct full-scale clinical trials in three phases, following European standards rooted in evidence-based medicine principles. These trials began in Riga in 2006, but were prematurely terminated [71]. The second-phase trial, aiming to assess the drug's safety, effectiveness, and optimal dosage, was abruptly stopped by its sponsor-the drug manufacturer.…”

Meldonium Supplementation in Professional Athletes: Career Destroyer or Lifesaver?

“…Meldonium is used as an anti-anginal medication in countries outside the European Union because it prevents post-infarction ischemia and the progression of atherosclerosis. It improves cardiac functional parameters and reduces the incidence and severity of arrhythmias [ 39 , 40 , 41 ]. Dysregulation of fatty acid metabolism in right ventricular failure is caused by the reduction in the expression of PGC1α and PPARδ, which targets the genes responsible for producing critical enzymes in fatty acid β-oxidation.…”

Доказательства Вреда: Опыт Пациентов И медицинские Стандарты В судебных Решениях

“…Наряду с общим пониманием, для социальных исследователей важна контекстуализация рассматриваемых категорий. Как стандарты доказательности в медицине (Chirikova et al 2021;Geltzer 2009), так и составляющие пациентоориентированной помощи (Liberati et al 2015) не универсальны, а детерминированы социальным и историческим контекстами. Этот взгляд задает направление социологических исследований -эмпирическое изучение компонентов доказательной медицины и пациентоориентированности в конкретном обществе.…”