Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5976_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана
.pdf
are provided should all be standardized. Selecting a matching control for certain natural
goods, such as ginger, which has a distinct odor, is a difficult challenge. Herbal medications
may not be standardized as a treatment for a population because of their unique approach.
For analyzing the safety, effectiveness, pharmacokinetics, quality, good manufacturing prac-
tices (GMP), post-marketing surveillance, and other aspects of conventional potential medi-
cations, scientifically sound guidelines and robust techniques, and guidelines have been
established. Herbal products, on the other hand, are not subjected to the same examination.
Furthermore, clinical trials involving herbal products are linked to poor design and reporting.
This is unexpected given the widespread acceptance of this style of healing among people of
various cultures and religions in both industrialized and developing count ries. Botanicals
have a shady reputation for all of these reasons [10].
3.1 Study design of clinical trials
Various claims about herbal medicine’sefficacy are frequently viewed with skepticism,
owing to flaws in trial design and study methods [2]. In the modern world of medicine where
RCTs are highly used to test the hypothesis, traditional medicine’s holistic and individualistic
techniques, in which herbal remedies are personal ized to individual patients, typically
including many plants in a bespoke formulation, may not be suitable for a randomized-
controlled design [5]. Herbal medicines have a distinct color, taste, and odor, making
placebo-controlled trials challenging to conduct. Furthermore, deciding whether to use an
herbal product as an active reference medicine/comparator or one from contemporary med-
icine is a source of concern. When employing herbal remedies, it is extremely difficult and
impossible to have active and control groups with equal organoleptic charac teristics. Because
of the varied bioavailability of the active elements, variances in the type of formulations uti-
lized, even though they contain the same ingredients, provide different results [11]. Clinical
trials of herbal medicines have been proven to have flaws in study design, implementation,
and data processing. Previous clinical trials using herbal medications have revealed an insuf-
ficient number of patients, inappropriate randomization, and selection bias [12]. Herbal medi-
cation reports fall short of the recommendations of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting
Trials (CONSORT) standards, which explain the ambiguity and inconsistency in their safety
and efficacy assessments. Given these constraints, Cochrane reviews determined that no well-
designed trial has been done with herbal medications, and there is insufficient supporting
data for their safety and effectiveness for the clinical condition in question [13,14]. When
an herbal drug trial is planned, other considerations may be made in addition to research
design, eligible criteria, and outcome measures. The effects provided by an investigational
herbal medication should be able to be captured or detected by outcome measurements.
Some constructs may not be meaningful in a traditional herbal medicine perspective; hence
the outcome measures may differ from those employed in synthetic medication trials [15].
3.2 Pharmacokinetic evaluation
Pharmacokinetic st udies on phytochemical natural compounds are challenging to conduct.
This is because the active ingredient/active principle is frequently unknown, and the
11. Clinical, ethical, and regulatory issues of botanicals268
https://t.me/med1917
presence of multiple active components makes pharmacokinetic evaluation difficult and com-
plex [16]. When polyherbal formulations are used, the issues of pharmacokinetic pro filing in
phase I of drug development are exacerbated. This necessitates the standardization of several
active chemicals as well as their quantification in body fluids. When patients seek therapy
from both traditiona l and modern health systems, pharmacokinetic evaluation becomes quite
complicated [17]. Conventional drugs are thoroughly examined for their dose-effect response,
and the safest dose is established based on body weight, drug interactions, and other factors,
potentially reducing the risk of adverse effects [18]. Dose calculation in herbal medicine is a
difficult problem to tackle for a variety of reasons. The active ingredient(s) and quantity of the
active ingredient(s) in the plant and the raw material from which the herba l medication is
made are frequently unclear. There is a risk of harmful medication reactions due to a lack
of studies assessing the interactions of herbal medicines with conventional pharmaceuticals
(ADRs). Not only that but there is a lack of evidence on the dose-dependent effects and prob-
able negative effects of the same when higher amounts are consumed. The presence of several
active compounds, as well as discrepancies in the reported dosage and treatment duration of
herbal remedies, poor standardization and lack of quality control of herbal preparations, and
the presence of several active compounds are some of the issues that make dose calculation
difficult [17].
3.3 Adverse reactions
Several accounts exist on the negative effects of natural goods, some of which have quite
serious implications. The harmful effects of the intrinsic ingredients or adulterants/contam-
inants that are present in the preparation, as well as herb-drug/herb-herb interactions, can all
be ascribed to the usage of herbal products. Herbal goods fall short in contrast to conven-
tional drugs due to low-quality control standards and insufficient purity and potency moni-
toring. Herbs derived from polluted places (areas with soil, water, or air pollution owing to
industrial emissions) or from poor farming practices result in low-quality, unfit-for-human-
consumption goods [19]. Herbal preparations may vary from batch to batch, even if they
are made from the same herbs because phytochemical content can fluctuate depending on
the plant’s harvesting time, climatic conditions, geographical locations, harvesting methods,
and environmental conditions can affect the presence of certain elements (such as heavy
metals) depending on the water, soil, and air conditions in that region. The variations in herb-
al product preparation have an impact on the health benefits seen. Allergens, pollens, toxins
(aflatoxin, mycotoxins brevetoxin B, digoxin, sikimitoxin), bacteria (Escherichia coli, Salmo-
nella), and heavy toxic metals (mercury, cadmium, lead, arsenic) may all be playing a role
in the observed negative consequences. Many adverse effects ranging from mild to severe
have occurred due to the use of low-quality and contaminated products [1].
3.4 Standardization of botanical nomenclature
The identification of the alleged plant is the first step in ensuring quality control of thera-
peutic plants. Unambiguous nomenclature is critical in botany for precisely defining the ma-
terial utilized in botanical medications and food supplements, as well as plants researched by
3. Clinical issues of botanicals 269
https://t.me/med1917
phytochemists. Whether studying chemistry, pharmacology, or toxicology, the evidence
foundation for herbal remedies requires correct and widely acknowledged names for the bo-
tanicals contained. These names must be consistent and distinct. Botanical names for species,
on the other hand, may not always cover species in the naturalistic meaning [20]. Botanical
nomenclature isn’t always clear, as the different botanical authorities (e.g., the Royal Botan-
ical Garden-Kew, the Missouri Botanical Garden [MOBOT]) regularly disagree. Botanical
conferences, on the other hand, are committed to establishing consensus and defining a
unique valid binomial for each species. Different herbal substances are sometimes referred
to by the same name, which can lead to misidentification and unintentional usage of herbal
remedies, resulting in unwanted side effects. Fang ji refers to the roots of Aristolochia fangchi,
Stephania tetrandra, and Cocculus trilobus. Consumers reported serious renal difficulties after
A. fangchi (Guang Fang Ji) was accidentally ingested instead of S. tetrandra (Han Fang Ji)
for its weight loss bene fits. Following a thorough investigation, it was discovered that the
adverse effects were caused by unintended ingestion of Aristolochic acid-containing
A. fangchi (Guang Fang Ji) products [21]. Aristolochic acid-containing herbal products were
then banned in the European union (EU), the United States, and Austral ia. However,
misidentification of herbs as aristolochic acid-containing herbal products continued to be pro-
duced and consumed due to confusion/similarity in common names [22]. Consumers have a
prevalent idea that herbal products are low-risk, to the point that everything natural is
equated with safety. Any negative consequences of its intake are often disregarded, and
hence the cause-effect is not recognized in this scenario. Users frequently dismiss the possi-
bility that their usage of herbal treatment is generating the reported negative effects due to
their ignorance or lack of information. As a result, their continued usage of herbal products
may exacerbate the disease. Patients do not tell their doctors about their herbal medication
use for a variety of reasons, both known and unknown. Consumers are uninformed of the
need of reporting herbal products used as well as any harmful effects that may have resulted
from them [23 ].
4. Ethical issues of botanicals
Scientific validity is a requirement for any herbal medication trial to be ethical, which
means that the experiment should be organized and carried out in a way that can be expected
to produce scientifically valid results and societal value [24]. In this context, herbal drug trials
face obstacles such as justifying study design and technique, as well as determining the qual-
ity control and standardization of herbal medication under investigation.
4.1 Quality control
Quality control of herbal produ cts is frequently highlighted as one of the key hurdles in
generating reliable evidence to support the clinical advantages of the tested products in herb-
al medication trials, particularly in light of the requirement to preserve external validity [25].
Variation in herbal constituents from product to product poses a substantial problem for
quality control and standardization of herbal medications under investigation and raises
11. Clinical, ethical, and regulatory issues of botanicals270
https://t.me/med1917
serious concerns about the reproducibility of resu lts. Developing a chemical fingerprint of the
drug under study using high-performance liquid chromatograph y (HPLC), for example,
should be a minimum requirement for any herbal drug to be investigated in a clinical trial
[26]. National Pharmacopoeias exist in some countries, with precise criteria for the quality
of herbal medications and the preparation of monographs [27]. Herbal medicine frequently
elicits pha rmacological effects through many chemicals, and the complexity of synergistic,
additive, and/or antagonistic pharmacological actions of several constituents in herbal med-
icines contributes to the overall pharmacological effect. According to increasing studies,
several herbal crude extracts as a whole and/or many herbs in complex formulations may
have better efficacies than similar doses of individual active components or isolated single
compounds [28]. Chromatographic fingerprinting is an analytical technique that combines
the techniques of HPLC, thin-layer chromatography (TLC), and gas chromatography to pro-
duce a fingerprint that is specific to herbal medicinal products (HMP). This fingerprint is
made up of a series of peaks that are exclusive to the herbal components used. As a result,
the generation of a unique fingerprint aids qualitative and quantitative analysis. To detect
adulteration, principal component analysis can be employed to compare fingerprint patterns
[29]. The part of the plant to be used should be confirmed by comparing its botanical char-
acteristics. In addition, determining the level of environmental exposure of the plant compo-
nent aids in determining the quantities of adulterants/contaminants. It is critical to conduct
rigorous premarket and postmarket evaluations to ensure the safe and effective use of quality
botanicals. Dealers of herbal products (manufacturers, packagers, distributors, sellers, etc.)
should be required to meet certain legal standards related to the usage of their HMPs,
such as GMP, adverse drug reactions (ADR), pharmacovigilance, and so on. It is undeniable
that the quality of the beginning material has an impact on the quality of the HMP. Peo ple
must be informed about the potential benefits and drawbacks of natural health products
(NHP) through well-designed educational and awareness programs. In addition, healthcare
practitioners/clinicians require an in-depth understanding of medicinal plants/herbs and
their potential health consequences [10].
4.2 Risk assessment
Risk assessment is one of the most important aspects of human subject research’s ethical
acceptability. To support and justify clinical trials in risk-benefit analysis, existing data on
toxicity, dosage form, and potential side effects of recommended herbal drugs under research
are required. Any herbal drug trials should only be carried out if the risks to trial subjects are
kept to a minimum and are proportional to the expected benefits [4]. Herbal medicine is
thought to be all about using natural products, thus it should have been safe and harmless,
according to popular belief. As a result of this attitude, herbal drug users and even healthcare
professionals may overlook any unfavorable symptoms that coul d be associated with an
herbal product, resulting in underreporting of adverse drug reactions of locally used tradi-
tional herbal medication [30]. Unwanted reactions can occur as a resu lt of the toxicity of herb-
al constituents alone, as well as manufacturing issues such as faulty processing procedures,
contamination, and adulteration with toxic compounds or foreign debris. Furthermore,
significant interactions with other medicines may occur, potentially leading to negative
4. Ethical issues of botanicals 271
https://t.me/med1917
effects [31]. Even though the World Health Organization (WHO) has produced standards for
the safety monitoring of herbal pharmaceuticals, herbal medicine pharmacovigilance con-
tinues to encounter several problems, resulting in the low dep endability of safety evidence
accessible in the scientific literature. The ability to effectively recognize therapeutic plants
from their related relatives, poorer substitutes, adulterants, and counterfeits constitutes a sub-
stantial dif ficulty in herbal medicine pharmacovigilance. Nonclinical studies may be required
to enhance the human experience, especially in the identification of chronic toxicity that can
emerge following the long-term use of investigational herbal medications. Herbal medica-
tions are also occasionally evaluated in different dosages, formulations, and/or durations
from those utilized in standard therapy.
4.3 Intellectual property and botanicals
Traditional medicine’s evolution into a functional health system has been hampered by the
lack of a good framework for protecting the intellectual property included in traditional med-
ical knowledge. Due to the importance given to intellectual property in the globalized world
and awaren ess that traditional knowledge has been wrongfully used in the past, traditional
knowledge holders have been hesitant to share their information, even with academics in
their own countries. The lack of an appropriate framework to protect IPR derived during
the successful development of a well-known herbal product for commercialization has also
deterred huge corporations from participating in the development process [32].
5. Regulatory issues of botanicals
Herbal medicines have seen a resurgence of interest due to a desire to capture the wisdom
of traditional healing systems, particularly in Europe and North America, where herbal prod-
ucts have been incorporated into so-called “alternative,”“complementary,”“holistic,” or
“integrative” medical systems [33]. The growing interest in self-care in the second half of
the 20th century resulted in a massive increase in the popularity of traditional healing tech-
niques, including the use of herbal remedies; this was especially true in the United States.
Consumers have expressed favorable feelings toward these products, owing to their belief
that they are of natural rather than synthetic origin, that they are more likely to be safe
than drugs, that they are considered part of a healthy lifestyle, and that they can help to avoid
unnecessary contact with conventional Western medicine. This assumption that herbal and
natural goods are safer than synthetic medicines can only be confirmed by placing regulatory
requirements on these items, which must be prep ared following good manufacturing prac-
tices. For the safety and efficacy of these therapeutic goods made from natural or herbal sour-
ces, standard operating procedures (SOP) leading to Good Agricultural Practice (GAP), Good
Laboratory Practice (GLP), Good Supply Practice (GSP), and GMP are becoming increasingly
relevant.
For the first time, herbal medicines were included in the WHO International Conference on
Drug Regulatory Authorities in 1986 [34]. In 1991, WHO suggested criteria for the assessment
of herbal medicines were adopted by the 6th International Conference on Drug Regulatory
11. Clinical, ethical, and regulatory issues of botanicals272
https://t.me/med1917
Authorities (ICDRA) [35]. These criteria comprise fundamental quality, safety, and efficacy
standards for herbal medications. National regulatory authorities, scientific organizations,
and manufacturers will benefit greatly from these principles when evaluating submitted doc-
uments (Table 11.1). The WHO monographs were created to provide scientific knowledge on
the safety, efficacy, and quality control of medicinal plants, as well as to make herbal medi-
cine use easier. According to WHO guidelines from 1993, manufacturers and regulatory or-
ganizations must share equal responsibility for quality assurance of herbal medical products
[36]. Looking at the various uses of herbs in today’s world; one can realize the need for “Reg-
ulations” in their use arise from the safety and efficacy concern.
5.1 Regulatory framework of different countries
5.1.1 Regulations in the United States of America
The Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act in the United States classifies a product primarily
based on its intended use. As evidenced by, among other things, the products accompanying
labeling claims, advertising materials, and oral or written statements, a botanical product’s
intended use may be as a food (including a dietary supplement), a drug (including a biolog-
ical drug), a medical device (e.g., gutta-percha), or a cosmetic (Food and Drug Administra-
tion, 2016). The FDA regulates products categorized as pharmaceuticals under the
jurisdiction of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act and its amendments. According to current
regulations, if a botanical drug product has no prior marketing history in the United States, if
available evidence of safety and effectiveness does not warrant inclusion of the product in an
existing, approved category of over-the-counter (OTC) drugs, or if the proposed indication is
not appropriate for nonprescription use, the manufacturer must file a new drug application
with the FDA to obtain FDA approval to market the product for the proposed use. If there is
inadequate data on the safety and efficacy of a botanical medicinal product to warrant a new
drug application, new clinical studies have to be performed. Herbs are sold as dietary
TABLE 11.1 Regulatory Guidelines of botanicals in a different jurisdiction.
Country Regulatory guidelines
USA Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
Australia Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)
Canada Health Canada (HC)
China National Medical Products Administration (NMPA)
India Ministry of AYUSH
Japan Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (MHLW) for Medicines
UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)
EU European Medicines Agency (EMA)
5. Regulatory issues of botanicals 273
https://t.me/med1917
supplements because the entire procedure is rather costly. An orally eaten substance that fits
the definition of a “dietary supplement” under section 201(ff) of the Food Drug and Cos-
metics Act may be lawfully sold under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act
of 1994 (DSHEA). Only two FDA-approved botanical medications are available: Veregen
(sinecatechins ointment) for the topical treatment of external genital and perianal warts
[37], and Mytesi (crofelemer) for the symptomatic alleviation of noninfectious diarrhea in
HIV/AIDS patients on antiretroviral therapy [38].
5.1.2 Regulations in Australia
The Therapeutic Goods Act of 1989 establishes the legal framework for the import, export,
manufacture, and distribution of medicines in Australia. It covers all areas of the law,
including the advertisement, labeling, and product appearance, as well as the criteria for
listing or registering all therapeutic goods in the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods
(ARTG). Therapeutic products manufacturers in Australia are required to be licensed, and
their production procedures must adhere to GMP guidelines. Unless specifically exempted
or excluded, all medicines made for supply in Australia must be recorded or registered in
the ARTG. Listed drugs are thought to pose a lower risk than those that have been registered.
The majority of supplemental medications (for example, herbal, vitamin, and mineral prep-
arations) are list ed items. Medicines that have been determined to pose a higher risk must
be registered (not listed). Nonprescription (low-risk, over-the-counter) and prescription
(high-risk) drugs are both registered. Vitamin, mineral, herbal, aromatherapy, and homeo-
pathic products are exam ples of complementary treatments (sometimes known as “tradi-
tional” or “alternative” therapies). Depending on the ingredients and claims made,
complementary medications may be listed or registered. Following are examples of some
registered complementary medicines: Ferro tab (175706), Citracal 250 mg tablets bottle
(80764), and Phosphate phebra (AUST R 292515). The AR lists the majority of supplementary
medicines [39].
5.1.3 Regulations in Canada
The results of an Expert Advisory Committee on Herbs and Botanical Preparations, as well
as the Canadian Food and Drug Act, were used to provide an overview of the challenges sur-
rounding the regulation of herbal products in Canada [40 ]. Case studies of herbal toxicity
were found to highlight some of the risks associated with herbal medications, and references
were supplied to assist health professionals in searching the literature for clinical trials that
have assessed the efficacy of these drugs. Herbal items that are not registered as pharmaceu-
ticals in Canada are sold as foods and are thus free from the drug review procedure, which
assesses the efficacy and safety of the product. In 1984, the Health Protection Branch (HPB)
organized an Expert Advisory Committee on Herbs and Botanical Preparations to advise
them. HPB published lists of hazardous herbal products in 1987, 1989, 1992, and 1993. Con-
sumers and the herbal sector both reacted positively to the previous publication. The newly
formed Office of Natural Health Products (currently the Natural Health Products Directorate)
is in charge of all regulatory functions, including premarket product labeling assessments,
manufacturer licensing, postapproval monitoring, and compliance and implementation of
the House Health Committee’s recommendations [41].
11. Clinical, ethical, and regulatory issues of botanicals274
https://t.me/med1917
5.1.4 Regulations in China
The Register of Chinese Herbal Medicine, which has over 450 members, was established in
1987 to oversee the practice of Chinese Herbal Medicine (CHM). Many herbal treatments
have been used for centuries, and it is considered that they must work in most circumstances.
In China, for example, about 7000 kinds of plants are utilized as herbal remedies, although
only 230 of the mo st regularly used have undergone extensive pharmacological, analytical,
and clinical research. The Chinese pharmacopeia includes 784 traditional Chinese medicines
(TCM) and 509 Chinese patent medicines in its 2000 edition. Herbal medicines are typically
classified as medicinal items in China, with certain marketing regulations. According to the
Drug Administration Law, new medications must be examined and approved. Manufac-
turers in China are permitted to advertise Health Foods that make therapeutic claims from
a list of predefined therapeutic claims (now 27 claims). As a result, before these products
can be approved, they must pass a rigorous testing and premarket approval process, which
includes toxicity testing when a product contains a new ingredient [42].
5.1.5 Regulations in India
After understanding the global demand, the Indian government understood that Good
Manufacturing Practices for pharmacies manufacturing Ayurveda, Siddha, and Unani med-
icines are required to increase the quality and standard of products. These regulations specify
the infrastructure, people, and quality control requirements for the manufacture of herbal
drugs. The industry is required to comply with GMP requirements. The GMP certificate
can be obtained instantly by qualifying units. Registered practitioners and teaching institu-
tions that make medicines for their patients have been granted an exemption. The Depart-
ment of Indian Systems of Medicine and Homeopathy (ISM&H) is attempting to draft
standards for the licensing of new patent and proprietary homeopathic medications that
will ensure their safety and efficacy. Indian Pharmacopoeia covers a few Ayurvedic medi-
cines and monographs have been given for clove, guggul, opium, mentha, senna, etc. Even
though the Indian Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia provides monographs for 258 different Ayur-
vedic medications, the requirements are insufficient to ensure the purity of the botanical com-
ponents. Indian Herbal Pharmacopoeia, 2002, was iss ued by the Indian Drug Manufacturers
Association (IDMA) and contains 52 monographs on commonly used medicinal herbs in In-
dia. These monographs have been updated with the most recent scientific information [43].
5.1.6 Regulations in Japan
Traditional Japanese medicine, which has been practiced in Japanese society for over a
1000 years, can be separated into folk medicine and Chinese medicine (or Kampo medicine).
Kampo medicine is so popular in Japan that it appears to have the largest per capita intake of
herbal medicine in the world. The Ministry of Health and Welfare (MHW) has registered 146
Kampo medicines as drugs, and they are covered by the National Health Insurance. For the
gathering of adverse reaction data, the MHW has three key systems. The first is a voluntary
scheme that enlists the participation of 2915 monitoring hospitals. The Pharmacy Monitoring
System, which comprises 2733 pharmacies, collects information on adverse events to OTC
drugs. Manufacturer Adverse Reaction Reporting is the third system. The responsible com-
pany reports these incidents to the MHW, using information from medical conferences and
5. Regulatory issues of botanicals 275
https://t.me/med1917
journals. Without clinical validation trials, Kampo medicines were accepted. In 1989, around
80% of doctors said they prescribed Chinese medicine. Traditional medications are seen as
safe in Japanese society, and physicians typically recognize Chinese medicine as a comple-
ment to contemporary medicine. Raw herbs that have been used as folk medicine for a
long time and have also been employed as ingredients in commercial products are each docu-
mented in their monograph. These goods can be used for the uses listed in the monograph
without restriction. The claims and rules of combinations of herbal ingredients are deter-
mined based on the pharmacological activities of the substances; local traditional use is not
sufficient for approval as a medicine [44]. If a monograph isn’t available, the Japanese Phar-
macopoeia’s claims are utilized as a guide.
5.1.7 Regulations in the United Kingdom
The situatio n with herbal medicines in the United Kingdom has been explored in several
studies. It was suggested that herbal goods be licensed as medicines as special items; it was
believed that unlicensed preparations accounted for more than 80% of herbal sales [45]. Many
medicinelike products on the British herbal market are still unregistered for two reasons:
adequate evidence on efficacy, safety, and quality may not be available, and the registration
price is prohibitively expensive. In the United Kingdom, herbal remedies/medicines have
three legal statuses: (i) Because the majority of herbal products are unlicensed, no medical
claims may be made about them. (ii) Licensed medical products must have evidence of qual-
ity, safety, and efficacy and are governed by the Medicines Control Agency; (iii) Herbal med-
icines provided by an herbalist are free from licensing under the 1968 Medicines Control Act.
Since 1996, the Medicines Control Agency has incorporated unlicensed herbal remedy
adverse reaction reports in its scope, and it now monitors all three categories [46].
5.1.8 Regulations in EU
Herbal medicinal products, including traditionally used herbal medicinal products, are
covered by the European Medicines Agency ’ s Directive on Medicinal Products for Human
Use. Since 2004, a specific assessment method for herbal medicinal products with a therapeu-
tic use based on traditional practice has been in place inside the European Union’s regulatory
framework. Herbal medicinal products are “classified as medicines” under EU medicinal law
Directive 2004/24/EC and are regulated as such. The European Medicines Agency is in
charge of these products’ safety, efficacy, and premarket approval (EMA). Traditional use in-
cludes European and non-European uses. The medicinal use of herbal compounds, prepara-
tions, and combinations is well-known outside of the EU, with a long history that is well
recorded in several medical systems. The WHO has addressed this; however, the European
Commission has declared that herbal products from other systems of medicine can be sub-
jected to the same procedures as traditional herbal medicinal commodities. Medicinal prod-
ucts or traditional formulations are employed on a personalized basis in many non-Western
medical systems: the composition of the medicinal product is adapted for the particular pa-
tient, based on a tradition al diagnosis. As a result, traditional medicin es from non-European
traditions frequently enter the European system on two feet: a Western indication for which
registration is sought, but with a dossier explaining traditional use in terms of, say, TCM or
Ayurvedic principles. It appears that establishing this from a non-European perspective is
easier than accepting it in European regulatory practice.
11. Clinical, ethical, and regulatory issues of botanicals276
https://t.me/med1917
6. Conclusion and future perspectives
Herbal medications, despite being a part of life since time immemorial, have received a lot
of criticism due to various quality issues. Despite inconsistencies in regulatory oversight, the
herbal medicinal business is flourishing, and clinical trials have a lot of room to grow in the
future. Another important reason contributing to the public’s loss of faith in herbal drugs is
the fraudulent manufacture of contaminated, substandard, and low-quality products to profit
from the increasing interest in herbal drugs. Because herbals are derived from natural sour-
ces, the general public feels they are safer than synthetic medicines. Many of the issues are
still unsolved, resulting in wide disparities in ethical standards among ethics committees.
Practical assistance is desperately needed to help clinical investigators and ethics committee
members overcome the challenges of dealing with ethical justification for the conduct of herb-
al medication studies. The allopathic industry’s experience implies that rules are required to
support science and research excellence. The time has arrived to accept herbal treatments in
the same way. “Effective Regulations Improve Research,” is the golden rule for herbal
medicines.
References
[1] Ekor M. The growing use of herbal medicines: issues relating to adverse reactions and challenges in monitoring
safety. Frontiers in Pharmacology 2014;4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2013.00177.
[2] Chen S, Pang X, Song J, Shi L, Yao H, Han J, et al. A renaissance in herbal medicine identification: from
morphology to DNA. Biotechnology Advances 2014;32(7):1237e44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.
2014.07.004.
[3] Willcox M, Siegfried N, Johnson Q. Capacity for clinical research on herbal medicines in Africa. Journal of Alter-
native & Complementary Medicine 2012;18(6):622e8. https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2011.0963.
[4] Koonrungsesomboon N, Morakote N, Karbwang J. Ethical considerations and challenges in herbal drug trials
with the focus on scientific validity and risk assessment. Phytotherapy Research 2021;35(5):2396e402.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ptr.6962.
[5] Parveen A, Parveen B, Parveen R, Ahmad S. Challenges and guidelines for clinical trial of herbal drugs. Journal
of Pharmacy and BioAllied Sciences 2015;7(4):329. https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-7406.168035.
[6] Aveni E, Bauer B, Ramelet AS, Decosterd I, Ballabeni P, Bonvin E, et al. Healthcare professionals’ sources of
knowledge of complementary medicine in an academic center. PLoS One 2017;12(9). https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0184979.
[7] Bahall M, Legall G. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices among health care providers regarding complementary
and alternative medicine in Trinidad and Tobago. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2017;17(1).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12906-017-1654-y.
[8] Walker LG, Anderson J. Testing complementary and alternative therapies within a research protocol. European
Journal of Cancer 1999;35(11):1614e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-8049(99)00199-9.
[9] Buchanan DR, White JD, O’Mara AM, Kelaghan JW, Smith WB, Minasian LM. Research-design issues in cancer-
symptom-management trials using complementary and alternative medicine: lessons from the National Cancer
Institute Community Clinical Oncology Program Experience. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2005;23(27):6682e9.
https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.10.728.
[10] Chugh NA, Bali S, Koul A. Integration of botanicals in contemporary medicine: road blocks, checkpoints and go-
ahead signals. Integrative Medicine Research 2018;7(2):109e25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imr.2018.03.005.
[11] Critchley JAJH, Zhang Y, Suthisisang CC, Chan TYK, Tomlinson B. Alternative therapies and medical science:
designing clinical trials of alternative/complementary medicinesdis evidence-based traditional Chinese medi-
cine attainable? The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2000;40(5):462e7. https://doi.org/10.1177/
00912700022009224.
References 277
https://t.me/med1917
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана