Intersections of technological and regulatory zones in regenerative medicine

Global Perspectives on Stem Cell Technologies

Volumn , Issue , 2017, Pages 51-84

  Hogle, Linda F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85011059194     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-63787-7_3     Document Type: Chapter

References (74)

1. Abraham, J. 2007. Drug Trials and Evidence Bases in International Regulatory Context. BioSocieties 2: 41-56.
2. Anderson, C. 2008. The End of Theory? The Data Deluge Makes the Scientific Method Obsolete. Wired, June 23.
3. Angus, D. 2015. Fusing Randomized Trials with Big Data: The Key to Self-learning Health Care Systems? Journal of the American Medical Association 314 (8): 767-768.
4. Avorn, J., and A. Kesselheim. 2015. The 21st Century Cures Act-Will It Take Us Back in Time? New England Journal of Medicine 372 (26): 2473-2475.
5. Barazzetti, G., S.A. Hurst, and A. Mauron. 2016. Adapting Preclinical Benchmarks for First-in-human Trials of Human Embryonic Stem Cell-based Therapies. Stem Cells Translational Medicine 5 (8): 1058-1066. doi:10.5966/sctm.2015-0222
6. Barry, A. 2001. Political Machines: Governing a Technological Society. London:Athlone Press.
7. Bateman-House, A., L. Kimberly, B. Redmond, N. Dubler, and A. Caplan. 2015. Right-to-try Laws: Hope, Hype, and Unintended Consequences. Annals of Internal Medicine 163 (10): 796-797.
8. Begley, C., and J. Ioannidis. 2015. Reproducibility in Science: Improving the Standard for Basic and Preclinical Research. Circulation Research 116 (1):116-126.
9. Benson, K., and A.J. Hartz. 2000. A Comparison of Observational Studies and Randomized Controlled Trials. New England Journal of Medicine 342 (25):1878-1886.
10. Bharadwaj, A. 2012. Enculturating Cells: The Anthropology, Substance, and Science of Stem Cells. Annual Review of Anthropology 41: 303-317.
11. Bharadwaj, A., and P. Glasner. 2009. Local Cells, Global Science: The Rise of Embryonic Stem Cell Research in India. London: Routledge.
12. boyd, d., and K. Crawford. 2012. Critical Questions for Big Data. Information, Communication, & Society 15 (5): 662-679.
13. Burnstein, D., and P. Burridge. 2014. Patient-Specific Pluripotent Stem Cells in Doxirubin Cardiotoxicity: A New Window into Personalized Medicine. Progress in Pediatric Cardiology 37 (1-2): 23-37.
14. Couzin, J., and G. Vogel. 2004. Renovating the Heart. Science 304 (5668): 184.
15. Dahabreh, I., and D. Kent. 2014. Can the Learning Healthcare System Be Educated with Observational Data? Journal of the American Medical Association 213 (2): 129-130.
16. Elkhenini, H., K. Davis, N. Stein, J. New, M. Delderfield, M. Gibson, J. Vestbo, A. Woodcock, and N. Bakerly. 2015. Using Electronic Medical Records (EMR) to Conduct Clinical Trials. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 15: 8-18.
17. Epstein, S. 2007. Inclusion: The Politics of Difference in Medical Research. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
18. Etheredge, L. 2007. A Rapid-Learning Health System. Health Affairs 26 (2):107-113.
19. Etheredge, L. 2012. http://www.innovationfiles.org/5-qs-on-data-innovation-withlynn- etheredge/
20. Etheredge, L.M. 2014. Rapid Learning: A Breakthrough Agenda. Health Affairs 33 (7): 1155-1162.
21. Expert Advisory Committee on Regulation. 2004. Smart Regulation: A Regulatory Strategy for Canada. Report to the Government of Canada, Ottawa.
22. Faulkner, A. 2015. Special Treatment? Exceptions and Exemptions in the Politics of Regenerative Medicine Gatekeeping in the UK in Global Context. Working Paper 46, Economic and Social Research Council.
23. Food and Drug Administration. 2013. Paving the Way for Personalized Medicine:FDA’s Role in the New Era of Product Development. Report to the Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD.
24. Haddad, C., H. Chen, and H. Gottweis. 2013. Unruly Objects: Novel Innovation Paths and Their Regulatory Challenge. In The Global Dynamics of Regenerative Medicine: A Social Science Critique, ed. A. Webster, 88-117. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
25. Hey, T., S. Tansley, and K. Tolle. 2009. The Fourth Paradigm: Data-Intensive Scientific Discovery. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Research.
26. Hoffman, S., and A. Podgurski. 2013. The Use and Misuse of Biomedical Data:Is Bigger Really Better? American Journal of Law & Medicine 39: 497-538.
27. Hogle, L.F. 2009. Pragmatic Objectivity and the Standardization of Engineered Tissues. Social Studies of Science 39 (5): 717-742.
28. Hogle, L.F. 2016a. The Ethics and Politics of Infrastructures: Creating the Conditions of Possibility for Big Data in Medicine. In The Ethics of Biomedical Big Data, ed. B. Mittelstadt and L. Floridi, 397-427. New York: Springer.
29. Hogle, L.F. 2016b. Data-intensive Resourcing in Healthcare. BioSocieties 11 (3):372-393.
30. Hudis, C. 2015. Big Data: Are Large Prospective Randomized Trials Obsolete in the Future? Breast 24 (S1): S15-S18.
31. Institute of Medicine. 2007. The Learning Healthcare System. In The Workshop Summary of the Roundtable of Evidence-Based Medicine, ed. L. Olsen, D. Aisner, and J.M. McGinnis. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
32. Institute of Medicine. 2013. Best Care at Lower Cost: The Path to Continuously Learning Health Care in America. In Report from the Committee on the Learning Healthcare System, ed. M. Smith, R. Saunders, L. Stuckhardt, and J.M. McGinnis. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
33. International Society for Stem Cell Research. 2016. Guidelines for Stem Cell Research and Clinical Translation. http://www.isscr.org/docs/default-source/guidelines/isscr-guidelines-for-stem-cell-research-and-clinical-translation. pdf?sfvrsn=2
34. Ioannidis, J. 2014. How to Make More Published Research True. PLoS Medicine 11 (10): e1001747. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001747
35. Jasanoff, S. 2004. The Idiom of Co-production. In States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and the Social Order, ed. S. Jasanoff. New York:Routledge.
36. Kallinikos, J., and N. Tempini. 2014. Patient Data as Medical Facts: Social Media Practices as a Foundation for Medical Knowledge Creation. Information Systems Research 25 (4): 817-833.
37. Kitchin, R. 2014. Big Data, New Epistemologies, and Paradigm Shifts. Big Data and Society 1 (1): 1-12. doi:10.1177/2053951714528481
38. Klein, S., and M. Hostetter. 2013. In Focus: Learning Healthcare Organizations. Quality Matters. Online Newsletter of the Commonwealth Fund. www.commonwealthfund. org/publications/newsletters/quality-matters/2013/augustseptember/in-focus-learning-health-care-systems
39. Knaapen, L. 2014. Evidence-based Medicine or Cookbook Medicine? Addressing Concerns over the Standardization of Care. Sociology Compass 8 (6): 823-836.
40. Krumholz, H. 2014. Big Data and New Knowledge in Medicine: The Thinking, Training, and Tools Needed for a Learning Health System. Health Affairs 33 (7): 1163-1170.
41. Lambert, H. 2006. Accounting for EBM: Notions of Evidence in Medicine. Social Science & Medicine 62: 2633-2645.
42. Laustriat, D., J. Gide, and M. Peschanski. 2010. Human Pluripotent Stem Cells in Drug Discovery and Predictive Toxicology. Biochemical Society Transactions 38 (4): 1051-1057.
43. Leonelli, S. (2014) ‘What Difference Does Quantity Make? On the Epistemology of Big Data in Biology’. Big Data & Society 1(1): 1-11. doi:10.1177/20539517145432395. Accessed 7 July 2015.
44. Löwy, I. 2003. Experimental Bodies. In Companion to Medicine in the Twentieth Century, ed. R. Cooter and J. Pickstone, 435-450. New York: Routledge.
45. Marks, H. 2009. What Does Evidence Do? Histories of Therapeutic Research. In Harmonizing Drugs: Standards in the 20th-Century Pharmaceutical History, ed. C. Masutti Bonah, A. Rasmussen, and J. Simon, 81-100. Paris: Ed. Glyphe.
46. Marks, P., C. Witten, and R. Califf. 2016. Clarifying Stem-cell Therapy’s Benefits and Risks. New England Journal of Medicine, November 30. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1613723.
47. Mayer-Schoenberger, V., and K. Cukier. 2013. Big Data: A Revolution that Will Transform How We Live, Think and Work. London: John Murray.
48. Meystre, S., G. Savova, K. Kipper-Schuler, and J. Kurdle. 2008. Extracting Information from Textual Documents in the Electronic Health Record: A Review of Recent Research. Yearbook of Medical Informatics: 128-144.
49. Montgomery, C. 2016. From Standardization to Adaptation: Clinical Trials and the Moral Economy of Anticipation. Science as Culture. Online in Advance of Publication. doi:10.1080/09505431.2016.1255721.
50. Mullard, A. 2015. Stem Cell Discovery Platforms Yield First Clinical Candidates. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 14: 589-591.
51. Mykhalovskiy, E., and L. Weir. 2004. The Problem of Evidence-based Medicine: Directions for Social Science. Social Science and Medicine 59 (5):1059-1069.
52. National Research Council Committee on a Framework for Developing a New Taxonomy of Disease. 2011. Toward Precision Medicine: Building a Knowledge Network for Biomedical Research and a New Taxonomy of Disease. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
53. Olson, M. 2002. Pharmaceutical Policy Change and the Safety of New Drugs. Journal of Law and Economics 45 (2): 615-642.
54. Pearson, S. 2007. Standards of Evidence. In The Learning Healthcare System, Workshop Summary of the Roundtable on Evidence-Based Medicine, ed. L. Olsen, D. Aisner, and J.M. McGinnis, 171-183. Washington, DC:National Academies Press.
55. Perriello, B. 2015. FDA, Med Tech in Bed on 21st Century Cures Act. Mass Device. Online Newsletter, December 21. http://www.massdevice.com/report-fda-medtech-in-bed-on-21st-century-cures-act/
56. Perrin, S. 2014. Preclinical Research: Make Mouse Studies Work. Nature News 507 (7493): 423-426.
57. Richardson, E. 2015. Health Policy Brief: Right-to-try Laws. Health Affairs. Online, March 5. http://www.healthaffairs.org/healthpolicybriefs/brief. php?brief_id=135
58. Rosemann, A. 2014. Standardization as Situation-Specific Achievement:Regulatory Diversity and the Production of Value in Intercontinental Collaborations in Stem Cell Medicine. Social Science & Medicine 122:72-80.
59. Rosemann, A., and N. Chaisinthop. 2016. The Pluralization of the International:Resistance and Alter-Standardization in Regenerative Stem Cell Medicine. Social Studies of Science 46 (1): 112-139. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed. 2014.10.018
60. Roski, J., G.W. Bo-Linn, and T.A. Andrews. 2014. Creating Value in Health Care Through Big Data: Opportunities and Policy Implications. Health Affairs 33 (7): 1115-1122.
61. Schork, N.J. 2015. Personalized Medicine: Time for One-Person Trials. Nature 520: 609-611.
62. Tahir, D. 2015. Interest Groups Seek to Add Goodies to Fast-Moving FDA Overhaul Bill. Modern Healthcare, May 12. www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20150512/NEWS/150519957
63. Timmermans, S., and M. Berg, eds. 2003. The Gold Standard: The Challenge of Evidence-based Medicine and Standardization in Health Care. Philadelphia:Temple University Press.
64. Timmermans, S., and S. Epstein. 2010. A World of Standards But Not a Standard World: Toward a Sociology of Standards and Standardization. Annual Review of Sociology 36 (36): 69-89.
65. Timmermans, S., and A. Mauck. 2005. The Promises and Pitfalls of Evidence-based Medicine. Health Affairs 24 (1): 18-28.
66. Topol, E. 2011. The Creative Destruction of Medicine: How the Digital Revolution Will Create Better Health Care. New York: Basic Books.
67. Tozzi, J. 2015. Safety Outsourced Under Bill Blessed by FDA, Medical Device Makers. Bloomberg News, December 21. www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-21/medical-device-makers-get-a-little-help-from-the-fda
68. Webster, A. 2013. Introduction: The Boundaries and Mobilities of Regenerative Medicine. In The Global Dynamics of Regenerative Medicine: A Social Science Critique, ed. A. Webster, 1-17. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
69. Weisz, G. 2005. From Clinical Counting to Evidence-based Medicine. In Body Counts: Medical Quantification in Historical and Sociological Perspectives, ed. G. Jorland, A. Opinel, and G. Weisz, 377-393. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
70. White House. 2015. A Strategy for American Innovation. Report of the National Economic Council and Office of Science and Technology Policy, October. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/strategy_for_american_innovation_ october_2015.pdf
71. Wills, C., and T. Moreiga, eds. 2010. Medical Proofs, Social Experiments: Clinical Trials in Changing Contexts. London: Ashgate.
72. Wood, S., and D. Zuckerman. 2015. The 21st Century Cures Act Could Be a Harmful Step Backwards. Washington Post, November 19. https://www.washingtonpost. com/opinions/the-21st-century-cures-act-could-be-a-harmfulstep- backward/2015/11/19/919ace5e-8e27-11e5-acff-673ae92ddd2b_story. html
73. Yamamoto, K., E. Sumi, T. Yamazaki, K. Asai, M. Yamori, S. Teramukai, et al. 2012. A Pragmatic Method for Electronic Medical Record-based Observational Studies: Developing an Electronic Medical Records Retrieval System for Clinical Research. British Medical Journal 2: e001622.
74. Young, S., and A. Karr. 2011. Deming, Data, and Observational Research: A Process Out of Control and Needs Fixing. Significance: 116-120.