Skip to content

Ethics, Legal and Social Issues

UBC BIOMOD 2024’s project on the DNA Origami Box exemplifies the cutting-edge advancements within the field of nanotechnology and medical science. This innovative research not only holds promise for transforming treatment approaches but also brings to light critical ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) regarding informed consent, data protection, patient safety, and the ethical considerations surrounding experimental treatments.

  1. Doctor - Ethical usage of treatment for Prostate Cancer (PCa) using DNA box with limited research on long term effects.

    The concerns in using a novel treatment technique stems from the unknown long term effects the treatment may have on the patient. Before the anti-CD3 antibody box can be used on patients to treat prostate cancer, there should be, ideally, longitudinal studies done on representative cohorts to investigate:

    • Non-specificity of this drug: how the box may affect other cells in the body that express PSMA receptors on their surfaces.

    • Effect of drug on cancer prognosis and potential relapse: T-cell and other immune-based therapy are known to alter genomic/epi;genomic signatures of prostate cancer which confers metastatic potential (Hirz et al., 2023).

    Until more is known on the long term effects of the box on the body there will be reduced willingness for this treatment to be used by medical professionals.

    Potential responses from non-researchers

    Many medical professionals may be hesitant to use the treatment on their patients over other, more tested treatments (Medlinskiene et al., 2021). The early adoption of new drugs is based on many factors, one of which is the participation in clinical trials and the volume of prescribing (Lublóy, 2014). This may result in it not being adopted in medical settings where a patient may benefit from its use. It could prevent the treatment from being recognized as useful, resulting in limited use internationally.

  2. Patient - Informed Consent

    Informed consent in clinical drug testing raises numerous challenges that must be addressed to ensure ethical and transparent research practices. One primary concern is that participants fully understand the study’s nature, benefits, and potential risks, which is critical for maintaining trust and integrity in the researcher-participant relationship. The Declaration of Helsinki provides a fundamental framework for addressing these concerns, emphasizing that participants must voluntarily consent after being adequately informed (Carlson et al., 2004). This includes a clear explanation of the study’s objectives, methods, potential risks, benefits, and alternative treatment options. In first-in-human research, ethical considerations become even more complex, as the study involves testing new drugs on humans for the first time, inherently carrying a higher degree of uncertainty and risk (Koonrungsesomboon et al., 2016). Researchers must ensure participants are fully aware of the experimental nature of the treatment and potential unknowns (Koonrungsesomboon et al., 2016). Additionally, researchers must address potential conflicts of interest to ensure that the information provided to participants is unbiased and comprehensive, maintaining the ethical integrity of the study. Overall, this project requires adherence to established ethical guidelines and a commitment to transparent and honest communication with participants.

    Potential responses from non-researchers

    A lack of rigorous informed consent processes and inconsistent data protection practices could lead to mistrust among patients and reluctance from ethics committees and hospital administrators to support the new DNA Origami Box treatment. This mistrust may result in reduced patient participation in clinical trials, potentially limiting the collection of vital data and slowing down the development of the treatment. Additionally, concerns about the security of sensitive patient information might cause medical practitioners to hesitate in administering the treatment, fearing legal repercussions and breaches of patient confidentiality. Furthermore, an ethical dilemma arises if the project’s drug proves to be ineffective, as patients receiving it may potentially experience worse outcomes compared to the control group, which typically receives a gold standard treatment known to be somewhat effective. This potential for patient harm underscores the importance of robust ethical considerations and transparency in the informed consent process.

  3. Patient - Costs associated with receiving this novel therapy

    Although our proposed therapy is designed to be lower cost compared to existing T cell therapies such as CAR T cells, the costs associated with the research, development, testing and deployment of a novel therapy can quickly accumulate. As such, it may not be accessible to lower income individuals or those without a comprehensive insurance plan. This unequal access can further expand to a global scale in which developing countries may not be able to afford, and therefore have access, to this therapy compared to developed countries. Additionally, these high costs can exacerbate existing healthcare inequities in marginalized communities such as racial and ethnic minorities as these communities often already face barriers when accessing existing and new treatments (Bourgeois et al., 2023).

    Potential responses from non-researchers

    To ensure the drug is accessible to all socioeconomic barriers, politicians and federal committees will likely intensify existing efforts and devise new strategies to ensure equitable distribution. This may include implementing subsidies and grants, expanding insurance coverage, and fostering new partnerships or agreements between governments, pharmaceutical companies and manufacturers.

  4. Patient - Can patients be harmed by not receiving the standard of care?

    Administering the best treatment available to patients is crucial. When this therapeutic reaches the clinical trial phase, patients may be randomly assigned to receive the new therapeutic, current standard of care treatment or a placebo treatment. Depending on the safety and efficacy of the therapeutic, patients may feel that they are being deprived of receiving the best care if it performs poorly and the standard of care has shown to be effective or resentful if they are not receiving the therapeutic and it is more effective than the standard treatment of care. There are risks and benefits that patients must be aware of before participating in the trial.

    Potential responses from non-researchers As DNA origami is a relatively new technology, the therapeutic might be faced with backlash and skepticism.

References

Bourgeois, A., Horrill, T. C., Mollison, A., Lambert, L. K., & Stajduhar, K. I. (2023). Barriers to cancer treatment and care for people experiencing structural vulnerability: A secondary analysis of ethnographic data. International Journal for Equity in Health, 22, 58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-023-01860-3 Carlson, R. V., Boyd, K. M., & Webb, D. J. (2004). The revision of the Declaration of Helsinki: Past, present and future. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 57(6), 695. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2004.02103.x Cell Culture Fundamentals: Safety Aspects of Cell Culture. (n.d.). Retrieved November 13, 2024, from https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/CA/en/technical-documents/technical-article/cell-culture-and-cell-culture-analysis/mammalian-cell-culture/safety-aspects-of Commissioner, O. of the. (2022). Ensuring Patient Safety and Drug Manufacturing Quality Through Partnership with European Union Regulators. FDA. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/fda-voices/ensuring-patient-safety-and-drug-manufacturing-quality-through-partnership-european-union-regulators Geraghty, R. J., Capes-Davis, A., Davis, J. M., Downward, J., Freshney, R. I., Knezevic, I., Lovell-Badge, R., Masters, J. R. W., Meredith, J., Stacey, G. N., Thraves, P., & Vias, M. (2014). Guidelines for the use of cell lines in biomedical research. British Journal of Cancer, 111(6), 1021–1046. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.166 Health, C. for D. and R. (2024, July 10). 510(k) Clearances. FDA; FDA. https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-approvals-and-clearances/510k-clearances Hirz, T., Mei, S., Sarkar, H., Kfoury, Y., Wu, S., Verhoeven, B. M., Subtelny, A. O., Zlatev, D. V., Wszolek, M. W., Salari, K., Murray, E., Chen, F., Macosko, E. Z., Wu, C.-L., Scadden, D. T., Dahl, D. M., Baryawno, N., Saylor, P. J., Kharchenko, P. V., & Sykes, D. B. (2023). Dissecting the immune suppressive human prostate tumor microenvironment via integrated single-cell and spatial transcriptomic analyses. Nature Communications, 14(1), 663. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-36325-2 Koonrungsesomboon, N., Laothavorn, J., & Karbwang, J. (2016). Ethical considerations and challenges in first-in-human research. Translational Research: The Journal of Laboratory and Clinical Medicine, 177, 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trsl.2016.05.006 Lublóy, Á. (2014). Factors affecting the uptake of new medicines: A systematic literature review. BMC Health Services Research, 14(469). https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-469 Medlinskiene, K., Tomlinson, J., Marques, I., Richardson, S., Stirling, K., & Petty, D. (2021). Barriers and facilitators to the uptake of new medicines into clinical practice: A systematic review. BMC Health Services Research, 21, 1198. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07196-4 Post, Share, Post, Print, Email, & License. (2022, October 19). 5 impactful drug trial failures from the last year. PharmaVoice. https://www.pharmavoice.com/news/5-impactful-drug-trial-failures-from-the-last-year/634422/ SAFETY DATA SHEET CXCL16, from mouse. (n.d.). https://b2b.sigmaaldrich.com/CA/en/sds/sigma/srp3195?userType=anonymous SAFETY DATA SHEET Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid. (n.d.). Retrieved November 13, 2024, from https://www.fishersci.com/store/msds?partNumber=BP118500&productDescription=EDTA+%28FREE+ACID%29+500G&vendorId=VN00033897&countryCode=US&language=en SAFETY DATA SHEET Trypsin. (n.d.). Retrieved November 13, 2024, from https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/CA/en/sds/mm/1.08444?userType=anonymous Smoteks, H. (2024, April 9). How Much Does It Cost to Get FDA Approval. Fulfyld. https://www.fulfyld.com/blog/how-much-does-it-cost-to-get-fda-approval-for-your-products/ Sun, D., Gao, W., Hu, H., & Zhou, S. (2022). Why 90% of clinical drug development fails and how to improve it? Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica. B, 12(7), 3049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsb.2022.02.002