Claudot Frédérique, Alla François, Fresson Jeanne, Calvez Thierry, Coudane Henry, Bonaïti-Pellié Catherine
Faculty of Medicine, Department of Forensic Medicine and Health Law, Nancy University, Nancy, France.
Int J Epidemiol. 2009 Aug;38(4):1104-8. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyp164. Epub 2009 Mar 31.
Research ethics have become universal in their principles through international agreements. The standardization of regulations facilitates the internationalization of research concerning drugs. However, in so-called observational studies (i.e. from data collected retrospectively or prospectively, obtained without any additional therapy or monitoring procedure) the modalities used for applying the main principles vary from one country to another. This situation may entail problems for the conduct of multi-centric international studies, as well as for the publication of results if the authors and editors come from countries governed by different regulations. In particular, several French observational studies were rejected or retracted by US peer-reviewed journals, because their protocols have not been submitted to an Institutional Review Board/Independent Ethics Committee (IRB/IEC).
National legislation case analysis.
In accordance with European regulation, French observational studies from data obtained without any additional therapy or monitoring procedure, do not need the approval of an IRB/IEC. Nevertheless, these studies are neither exempt from scientific opinion nor from ethical and legal authorization.
We wish to demonstrate through the study of this example that different bodies of law can provide equivalent levels of protection that respect the same ethical principles. Our purpose in writing this article was to encourage public bodies, scientific journals and researchers to gain a better understanding of the various sets of specific national regulations and to speak a common language.
通过国际协议,研究伦理在其原则上已变得具有普遍性。法规的标准化促进了药物研究的国际化。然而,在所谓的观察性研究中(即从回顾性或前瞻性收集的数据中获取,无需任何额外治疗或监测程序),应用主要原则所采用的方式在不同国家之间存在差异。这种情况可能给多中心国际研究的开展带来问题,对于来自受不同法规管辖国家的作者和编辑而言,在结果发表方面也会产生问题。特别是,一些法国的观察性研究被美国同行评审期刊拒绝或撤回,原因是其方案未提交给机构审查委员会/独立伦理委员会(IRB/IEC)。
国家立法案例分析。
根据欧洲法规,来自无需任何额外治疗或监测程序所获数据的法国观察性研究,无需IRB/IEC的批准。然而,这些研究既不能免除科学意见,也不能免除伦理和法律授权。
我们希望通过对这个例子的研究表明,不同的法律体系可以提供同等水平的保护,同时尊重相同的伦理原则。我们撰写本文的目的是鼓励公共机构、科学期刊和研究人员更好地理解各国不同的具体法规,并使用共同的语言。