Abstract
Low- and middle-income countries are increasingly selected as locations for international clinical trials. The consequences have been debated within and beyond the academic literature. Low- and middle-income countries are also referred to as nontraditional countries. This chapter reviews the extant literature related to this debate and identifies the three main—partially interrelated—concerns: a lack of contribution to building up local innovation capacity, a lack of local regulatory capacity, and the prevalence of questionable clinical research practices and fraud. A call for long-term capacity-building efforts of local researchers and regulators in nontraditional countries is a priority.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Cantner U, Rake B (2014) International research networks in pharmaceuticals: structure and dynamics. Res Policy 43:333–348
Haeussler C, Rake B (2017) The changing geography of clinical research: a critical analysis of its drivers. Ind Corp Chang 26:285–310
Thiers FA, Sinskey AJ, Berndt ER (2008) Trends in the globalization of clinical trials. Nat Rev Drug Disc 7:13–14
Drain PK, Parker RA, Robine M, Holmes KK (2018) Global migration of clinical research during the era of trial registration. PLoS One 13:e0192413
Lang T, Siribaddana S (2012) Clinical trials have gone global: is this a good thing? PLoS Med 9:e1001228
Nundy S, Gulhati CM (2005) A new colonialism? — Conducting clinical trials in India. New Eng J Med 352:1633–1636
Khin NA, Yang P, Hung HMJ, Maung-U K, Chen Y-F, Meeker-O’Connell A et al (2013) Regulatory and scientific issues regarding use of foreign data in support of new drug applications in the United States: an FDA perspective. Clin Pharmacol Ther 94:230–242
Varsakelis NC (2006) Education, political institutions and innovative activity: a cross-country empirical investigation. Res Policy 35:1083–1090
Fagerberg J, Srholec M (2008) National innovation systems, capabilities and economic development. Res Policy 37:1417–1435
Haakonsson SJ, Jensen PDØ, Mudambi SM (2013) A co-evolutionary perspective on the drivers of international sourcing of pharmaceutical R&D to India. J Econ Geogr 13:677–700
Maiti R, Raghavendra M (2007) Clinical trials in India. Pharmacol Res 56:1–10
Crone RK (2008) Flat medicine? Exploring trends in the globalization of health care. Acad Med 83
White K (2019) Science and engineering publication output trends: 2017 shows U.S. output level slightly below that of China but the United States maintains lead with highly cited publications. nsf.gov/statistics/2019/nsf19317/. Accessed 5 Sept 2021
Petryna A (2009) When experiments travel: clinical trials and the global search for human subjects. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
Gassmann O, Han Z (2004) Motivations and barriers of foreign R&D activities in China. R&D Manag 34:423–437
Epstein RJ (2007) Growth of the Asian health-care market: global implications for the pharmaceutical industry. Nat Rev Drug Disc 6:785–792
Wilson JF, Weale ME, Smith AC, Gratrix F, Fletcher B, Thomas MG et al (2001) Population genetic structure of variable drug response. Nat Genet 29:265–269
Glickman SW, McHutchison JG, Peterson ED, Cairns CB, Harrington RA, Califf RM, Schulman KA (2009) Ethical and scientific implications of the globalization of clinical research. New Eng J Med 360:816–823. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsb0803929
Varawalla N, Jain R (2011) Chapter 7–Clinical trials in India. In: Chin R, Bairu M (eds) Global clinical trials. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp 119–157
Furman JL, Porter ME, Stern S (2002) The determinants of national innovative capacity. Res Policy 31:899–933
O’Neill O (2002) Autonomy and trust in bioethics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Glantz LH, Annas GJ, Grodin MA, Mariner WK (1998) Research in developing countries: taking “benefit” seriously. Hast Cent Rep 28:38
Fisher JA (2009) Medical research for hire: the political economy of pharmaceutical clinical trials. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ
Annas GJ (2009) Globalized clinical trials and informed consent. New Eng J Med 360:2050–2053
Chang PL (2017) The abandoned stakeholders: pharmaceutical companies and research participants. J Bus Ethics 143:721–731
Yegros-Yegros A, van de Klippe W, Abad-Garcia MF, Rafols I (2020) Exploring why global health needs are unmet by research efforts: the potential influences of geography, industry and publication incentives. Health Res Pol Sys 18:47
Barrenho E, Miraldo M, Smith PC (2019) Does global drug innovation correspond to burden of disease? The neglected diseases in developed and developing countries. Health Econ 28:123–143
Pécoul B, Chirac P, Trouiller P, Pinel J (1999) Access to essential drugs in poor countries: a lost battle? JAMA 281:361–367
Merz S (2020) Global trials, local bodies: negotiating difference and sameness in Indian for-profit clinical trials. Sci Technol Hum Values. 0162243920963813
Largent EA, Fernandez LH (2017) Paying research participants: regulatory uncertainty, conceptual confusion, and a path forward. Yale J Health Policy Law Ethics 17:61–141
Leuker C, Samartzidis L, Hertwig R, Pleskac TJ (2020) When money talks: judging risk and coercion in high-paying clinical trials. PLoS One 15:e0227898
Mantzari E, Vogt F, Marteau TM (2014) Does incentivising pill-taking ‘crowd out’ risk-information processing? Evidence from a web-based experiment. Soc Sci Med 106:75–82
Cryder CE, John London A, Volpp KG, Loewenstein G (2010) Informative inducement: study payment as a signal of risk. Soc Sci Med 70:455–464
Millum J, Garnett M (2019) How payment for research participation can be coercive. Am J Bioeth 19:21–31
Gelinas L, White SA, Bierer BE (2020) Economic vulnerability and payment for research participation. Clin Trials 17:264–272
Jamrozik E, Selgelid MJ (2020) Human infection challenge studies in endemic settings and/or low-income and middle-income countries: key points of ethical consensus and controversy. J Med Ethics 46:601
Chingarande GR, Moodley K (2018) Disparate compensation policies for research related injury in an era of multinational trials: a case study of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. BMC Med Ethics 19:8
Kremer M (2002) Pharmaceuticals and the developing world. J Econ Perspect 16:67–90
White CM (2020) Current system of overseeing drug trials in developing countries by the FDA is dangerous. Ann Pharmacother 54:928–932
Rodríguez FS (2010) Governing ethical clinical research in developing countries: exploring the case of Mexico. Sci Public Policy 37:583–596
Zhou Q, Chen X-Y, Yang Z-M, Wu Y-L (2017) The changing landscape of clinical trial and approval processes in China. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 14:577–583
Jayaraman K (2012) India mulling stricter laws to curb unethical trials. Nat Med 18:182
Gupta YK, Padhy BM (2011) India’s growing participation in global clinical trials. Trends Pharmacol Sci 32:327–329
Aguilera B, DeGrazia D, Rid A (2020) Regulating international clinical research: an ethical framework for policy-makers. BMJ Glob Health 5:e002287
Hull D (2015) Reining in the commercialized foreign clinical trial. J Legal Med 36:367–401
Department of Health and Human Services (2010) Challenges to FDA’s ability to monitor and inspect foreign clinical trials. ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/dashboard/searchResults/titleDetail/PB2010114711.xhtml. Accessed 5 Sept 2021
Hoekman J, Frenken K, Zeeuw D d, Heerspink HL (2012) The geographical distribution of leadership in globalized clinical trials. PLoS One 7:e45984
Rake B, Haeussler C (2019) Did relaxing clinical trial regulation enhance the stock of scientific knowledge in India? Not necessarily. PLoS One 14:e0210163
Reid SE, Ramani SV (2012) The harnessing of biotechnology in India: which roads to travel? Technol Fore Soc Change 79:648–664
Dickersin K, Rennie D (2012) The evolution of trial registries and their use to assess the clinical trial enterprise. JAMA 307:1861–1864
Viergever RF, Li K (2015) Trends in global clinical trial registration: an analysis of numbers of registered clinical trials in different parts of the world from 2004 to 2013. BMJ Open 5:e008932
Kumari S, Mohan A, Saberwal G (2020) Hidden duplicates: 10s or 100s of Indian trials, registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, have not been registered in India, as required by law. PLoS One 15:e0234925
Anderson ML, Chiswell K, Peterson ED, Tasneem A, Topping J, Califf RM (2015) Compliance with results reporting at ClinicalTrials.gov. New Eng J Med 372:1031–1039
DeVito NJ, Bacon S, Goldacre B (2020) Compliance with legal requirement to report clinical trial results on ClinicalTrials.gov: a cohort study. Lancet 395:361–369
Resnik DB (2003) From Baltimore to Bell Labs: reflections on two decades of debate about scientific misconduct. Account Res 10:123–135
Carlisle JB (2021) False individual patient data and zombie randomised controlled trials submitted to anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 76:472–479
Woodhead M (2016) 80% of China’s clinical trial data are fraudulent, investigation finds. BMJ 355:i5396
Watson R (2015) EU to suspend hundreds of drug authorisations after doubts over clinical studies in Hyderabad. Brit Med J 350:h574
Seife C (2015) Research misconduct identified by the US Food and Drug Administration: out of sight, out of mind, out of the peer-reviewed literature. JAMA Intern Med 175:567–577
Zhang D, Freemantle N, Cheng KK (2011) Are randomized trials conducted in China or India biased? A comparative empirical analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 64:90–95
Desai K, Carroll I, Asch S, Hernandez-Boussard T, Ioannidis JP (2019) Extremely large outlier treatment effects may be a footprint of bias in trials from less developed countries: randomized trials of gabapentinoids. J Clin Epidemiol 106:80–87
Panagiotou OA, Contopoulos-Ioannidis DG, Ioannidis JPA (2013) Comparative effect sizes in randomised trials from less developed and more developed countries: meta-epidemiological assessment. Brit Med J 346:f707
Ray S, Shah I, Nundy S (2016) The research output from Indian medical institutions between 2005 and 2014. Curr Med Res Pract 6:49–58
Chen W, Xing Q-R, Wang H, Wang T (2018) Retracted publications in the biomedical literature with authors from mainland China. Scientometrics 114:217–227
Elango B, Kozak M, Rajendran P (2019) Analysis of retractions in Indian science. Scientometrics 119:1081–1094
Franzoni C, Scellato G, Stephan P (2011) Changing incentives to publish. Science 333:702
Walsh JP, Lee Y-N, Tang L (2019) Pathogenic organization in science: division of labor and retractions. Res Policy 48:444–461
Wong DR, Bhattacharya S, Butte AJ (2019) Prototype of running clinical trials in an untrustworthy environment using blockchain. Nat Commun 10:917
Cutter GR (2017) To catch a crook, you might try statistics. Nat Rev Neurol 13:9–10
Porter G (2018) Regulating clinical trials in India: the economics of ethics. Dev World Bioeth 18:365–374
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rake, B. (2022). Controversies with Clinical Trial Regulations in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. In: Faintuch, J., Faintuch, S. (eds) Integrity of Scientific Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99680-2_23
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99680-2_23
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-99679-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-99680-2
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)