Federally regulated institutional review boards: The aspects of a "model" IRB---Is the current system in need of a tune up or complete overhaul?

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are the primary gatekeepers for the protection of ethical standards of federally regulated research on human subjects in this country. This paper focuses on what general, broad measures that may be instituted or enhanced to exemplify a "model IRB". This is done by examining the current regulatory standards of federally regulated IRBs, not private or commercial boards, and how many of those standards have been found either inadequate or not generally understood or followed. The analysis includes suggestions on how to bring about changes in order to make the IRB process more efficient, less subject to litigation, and create standardized educational protocols for members. The paper also considers how to include better oversight for multi-center research, increased centralization of IRBs, utilization of Data Safety Monitoring Boards when necessary, payment for research protocol review, voluntary accreditation, and the institution of evaluation/quality assurance programs. ^ This is a policy study utilizing secondary analysis of publicly available data. Therefore, the research for this paper focuses on scholarly medical/legal journals, web information from the Department of Health and Human Services, Federal Drug Administration, and the Office of the Inspector General, Accreditation Programs, law review articles, and current regulations applicable to the relevant portions of the paper. ^ Two issues are found to be consistently cited by the literature as major concerns. One is a need for basic, standardized educational requirements across all IRBs and its members, and secondly, much stricter and more informed management of continuing research. There is no federally regulated formal education system currently in place for IRB members, except for certain NIH-based trials. Also, IRBs are not keeping up with research once a study has begun, and although regulated to do so, it does not appear to be a great priority. This is the area most in danger of increased litigation. Other issues such as voluntary accreditation and outcomes evaluation are slowing gaining steam as the processes are becoming more available and more sought after, such as JCAHO accrediting of hospitals. ^ Adopting the principles discussed in this paper should promote better use of a local IRBs time, money, and expertise for protecting the vulnerable population in their care. Without further improvements to the system, there is concern that private and commercial IRBs will attempt to create a monopoly on much of the clinical research in the future as they are not as heavily regulated and can therefore offer companies quicker and more convenient reviews. IRBs need to consider the advantages of charging for their unique and important services as a cost of doing business. More importantly, there must be a minimum standard of education for all IRB members in the area of the ethical standards of human research and a greater emphasis placed on the follow-up of ongoing research as this is the most critical time for study participants and may soon lead to the largest area for litigation. Additionally, there should be a centralized IRB for multi-site trials or a study website with important information affecting the trial in real time. There needs to be development of standards and metrics to assess the performance of the IRBs for quality assurance and outcome evaluations. The boards should not be content to run the business of human subjects' research without determining how well that function is actually being carried out. It is important that federally regulated IRBs provide excellence in human research and promote those values most important to the public at large.^

The association of peer victimization and/or bullying perpetration and body dissatisfaction in elementary students from the healthy passages baseline study

This is the first U.S. study to investigate the association between peer victimization and/or bullying perpetration and body image dissatisfaction in American elementary school students. The study used data collected from the Healthy Passages baseline cohort of 5152 ethnically diverse fifth grade students from Alabama, Texas, and California. The overall prevalence of body dissatisfaction in our fifth grade sample was 50%. Students who were dissatisfied with their bodies were 23% more likely to be involved in peer victimization than students who were satisfied with their bodies (OR = 1.23; 95% CI = 1.02, 1.48). No significant associations were found between bullying status or bully-victim status and body dissatisfaction. Other factors that contributed significantly to a student's body image status were BMI, level of self-worth, level of household income, gender, pubertal timing and support received from adults (other than parents). It is noteworthy that those who were dissatisfied were heavier, came from lower income homes and were more likely to be male. Additional longitudinal studies are needed to confirm these associations, especially among large ethnically and socio-economically diverse samples. ^

Interferon-gamma release assays for latent tuberculosis infection in child and young adult candidates or recipients of tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy

Background. Inhibition of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) is associated with progression of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) to active disease. LTBI screening prior to starting TNF inhibitor therapy is recommended. Blood tests, collectively known as interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs), offer a means other than the tuberculin skin test (TST) of screening for LTBI. However, in the setting of immune compromise, anergy may limit the clinical utility of IGRAs. ^ Methods. A cross-sectional study was conducted in children and young adults ≤ 21 years of age who were cared for at Texas Children's Hospital in Houston, TX, during 2011 and who were candidates for, or were receiving, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-inhibitor therapy. All subjects answered a risk factor questionnaire and were tested for LTBI by two commercially available IGRAs (QuantiFERON-Gold In-Tube assay and the T-SPOT.TB assay), along with the TST. T-cell phenotypes were evaluated through flow cytometry, both at baseline and after antigen stimulation. ^ Results. Twenty-eight subjects were enrolled. All were TST negative and none were IGRA positive. Results were negative for the 27 subjects who were tested with QuantiFERON-Gold In-Tube. However, 26% of subjects demonstrated anergy in the T-SPOT.T. Patients with T-SPOT. TB anergy had lower quantitative IFN-γ responses to mitogen in the QFT assay—the mean IFN-γ level to mitogen in patients without T-SPOT.TB anergy was 9.84 IU/ml compared to 6.91 IU/ml in patients with T-SPOT.TB anergy (P = 0.046). Age and use of TNF inhibitors, corticosteroids, or methotrexate use were not significantly associated with T-SPOT.TB anergy. Antigen stimulation revealed depressed expression of intracellular IFN-γ in subjects with T-SPOT. TB anergy. ^ Conclusions. The frequency of anergy in this population is higher than would be expected from studies in adults. There appears to be inappropriate IFN-γ responses to antigen in subjects with T-SPOT. TB anergy. This immune defect was detected by the T-SPOT. TB assay but not by the QuantiFERON-Gold In-Tube assay. Further data are needed to clarify the utility of IGRAs in this population.^