Availability of post-trial access in clinical trials: a review of clinical trial protocols submitted to the research ethics board of the University of the Philippines Manila

Objectives: Ethics guidelines such as the Declaration of Helsinki and the CIOMS International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research Involving Humans require the sponsors, in cooperation with relevant stakeholders, to provide post-trial access (PTA) to intervention and knowledge, especially in clinical trials held in resource-poor regions. To date, we have very limited knowledge in terms of whether PTA is provided at all, and in what form. To partially address this current limitation, this study wished to explore whether, for which type of drugs and in what form PTA is provided in the Philippines. Methods: We looked at all the clinical trial protocols submitted to the University of the Philippines Manila from 2012 to 2017. A total of 193 clinical trial protocols were included in the study. To identify whether, for which drug type and in what form PTA is provided, we gathered the following information: start and end date of the trial, name of study drug, tested indication of the study drug, region the sponsor is from, type/category of the study drug, type of funding agency, provisions for PTA (yes or no) and the explanation for the provisions. PTA provisions were further described according to the form in which PTA was provided and the types of drugs that were given PTA. Results: Of the 193 protocols, 51.81% indicated PTA, though PTA in the form identified in guidelines can be partially accounted for in only 29.5% (57). The most common form of PTA is the provision or sharing of information (40). None of the protocols provided PTA in the form of access to intervention after the trials, with the possible exemption of 10 protocols that declared future evaluation of the sponsor for PTA depending on patient need, and another seven that might offer the option to transfer to an open-label extension study after the trial. Conclusion: More work is needed if PTA, as stipulated in ethics guidelines, is to be reflected in reality

One stop shop: backbones trees for important phytopathogenic genera: I (2014)

Many fungi are pathogenic on plants and cause significant damage in agriculture and forestry. They are also part of the natural ecosystem and may play a role in regulating plant numbers/density. Morphological identification and analysis of plant pathogenic fungi, while important, is often hampered by the scarcity of discriminatory taxonomic characters and the endophytic or inconspicuous nature of these fungi. Molecular (DNA sequence) data for plant pathogenic fungi have emerged as key information for diagnostic and classification studies, although hampered in part by non-standard laboratory practices and analytical methods. To facilitate current and future research, this study provides phylogenetic synopses for 25 groups of plant pathogenic fungi in the Ascomycota, Basidiomycota, Mucormycotina (Fungi), and Oomycota, using recent molecular data, up-to-date names, and the latest taxonomic insights. Lineage-specific laboratory protocols together with advice on their application, as well as general observations, are also provided. We hope to maintain updated backbone trees of these fungal lineages over time and to publish them jointly as new data emerge. Researchers of plant pathogenic fungi not covered by the present study are invited to join this future effort. Bipolaris, Botryosphaeriaceae, Botryosphaeria, Botrytis, Choanephora, Colletotrichum, Curvularia, Diaporthe, Diplodia, Dothiorella, Fusarium, Gilbertella, Lasiodiplodia, Mucor, Neofusicoccum, Pestalotiopsis, Phyllosticta, Phytophthora, Puccinia, Pyrenophora, Pythium, Rhizopus, Stagonosporopsis, Ustilago and Verticillium are dealt with in this paper