Published in:International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Abstract: In this scoping review detailing the challenges of assessing new technologies for use in children, authors Nora Hutchinson, Lauren Otterman, Elisa Koppelman, Barbara E. Bierer, and colleagues highlight the substantial difficulties in incorporating children within the population-wide health technology assessment (HTA) system, as well as the uncertainty accompanying pediatric HTAs due to data constraints, lack of guidance and/or variation in guidance, between HTA bodies.
Hutchinson N, Otterman L, Bain PA, Koppelman E, Bierer BE. A Scoping Review of Challenges in Pediatric Health Technology Assessments with a Focus on Pharmaceutical Interventions. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. Published online 2025:1-34. doi:10.1017/S0266462325103188
October 22: In the article “Characteristics of long-term follow-up studies for gene therapies registered on ClinicalTrials.gov,” published in Gene Therapy, co-authors Carolyn Chapman, Emina Berbic, Ava Glazier, and Barbara Bierer report a descriptive study of key characteristics of LTFU gene therapy study protocols registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. The analysis enabled a better understanding of how registered LTFU studies are currently designed and stimulated ideas for improvement. Most notably, the results suggest a lack of harmonization in how safety outcomes are monitored and reported across LTFU studies. Standardization and/or harmonization of data and outcome reporting may increase the scientific value of these studies.
Chapman, C.R., Glazier, A., Berbić, E. et al. Characteristics of long-term follow-up studies for gene therapies registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. Gene Ther (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41434-025-00571-4
This webinar focused on how to responsibly integrate AI into the design, conduct, and oversight of clinical research, introducing two rapidly evolving applications:
Digital twins – simulated models of individual patients designed to predict disease trajectories and treatment responses, with the potential to enhance statistical power, optimize design, and reduce the number of participants assigned to control arms.
Synthetic data – artificially generated datasets that mirror the statistical properties of verified clinical data, with potential use in trial design, conduct, analysis, and regulatory submissions.
Comments provided to: U.S. Food and Drug Administration; FDA-2025-D-1797
Description: The Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard (MRCT Center) submitted public comments on the draft ICH E21 guidance regarding the inclusion of pregnant and breastfeeding women in clinical trials. The MRCT Center strongly supports the ethical inclusion of these historically understudied populations and emphasized the need for ethical and rigorous, well-designed research guided by participant and individual protections.
This webinar explores the MRCT Center’s work addressing the challenges of post-trial, continued access to investigational products. Post-trial access is a shared responsibility that should be planned before a trial begins. Even with careful planning, complex situations may arise, requiring sponsors to balance competing priorities and the needs of diverse stakeholders.
The MRCT Center’s Post-Trial Continued Access Task Force has developed principles, frameworks, and recommendations to guide equitable and fair decision-making about the continued provision of investigational medicines or the maintenance of significant-risk investigational devices after a trial ends.
The session includes a case study examining a scenario in which a trial’s primary endpoint is not met, but a subpopulation benefits, illustrating the difficult decisions sponsors and investigators must navigate in determining whether—and how—to provide post-trial, continued access.
Speakers:
Karla G. Childers, BA, MSJ, MSBE – Vice President, Bioethics, Policy & Partnerships, Johnson & Johnson
Brandy Ellis – Lived Experience Advocate
Ben Rotz, RPh – Associate Vice President, Global Medical Policy, Strategy, and Operations, Eli Lilly & Company
Moderated by: Sarah White, MPH, Executive Director, MRCT Center
In a Blood Advances article titled “The roadmap to integrate diversity, equity, and inclusion in hematology clinical trials: an American Society of Hematology initiative,” Barbara E. Bierer and co-authors outline a comprehensive strategy to address barriers to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in clinical research for classical hematologic diseases. These trials face unique challenges, including small sample sizes, methodological limitations, and underrepresentation of diverse populations. Through surveys and five international focus groups with patients, advocates, academia, regulators, industry, and research organizations, the team identified eight priority areas: (1) harmonizing demographic terminology, (2) engaging lived experience experts, (3) mitigating implicit bias, (4) strengthening the role of ethics committees and institutional review boards in upholding justice, (5) broadening eligibility criteria, (6) leveraging decentralized trial designs, (7) improving access to trial information, and (8) increasing engagement of community physicians. Implementing solutions in these areas will foster accessible, inclusive trials and generate representative data to improve research quality, regulatory decision-making, and patient care.
Alice Kuaban, Alysha K. Croker, Jeffrey Keefer, Leonard A. Valentino, Barbara E. Bierer, Stephen Boateng, Donna DiMichele, Patrick Fogarty, C. Michael Gibson, Anna M. Hood, Lloryn Hubbard, Antonella Isgrò, Karin Knobe, Leslie Lake, Iman Martin, Michel Reid, Jonathan C. Roberts, Wendy Tomlinson, Lanre Tunji-Ajayi, Harriette G.C. Van Spall, Caroline Voltz-Girolt, Allison P. Wheeler, Alan E. Mast, Stephanie Seremetis; The roadmap to integrate diversity, equity, and inclusion in hematology clinical trials: an American Society of Hematology initiative. Blood Adv 2025; 9 (4): 687–695. doi: https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2024013945
In an Accountability in Research article titled “Disparate data retention standards in biomedical research”, Barbara Bierer and Carolyn Lye, Minal Caron, Lauren Walsh, and Mark Barnes discuss disparate data retention standards for biomedical research. The article summarizes the divergent data retention standards set forth by federal agencies, grant programs, and research institutions, as well as other applicable requirements under law, contract, and policy. The authors also discuss the importance of data retention in the context of research professionalism, data sharing efforts, intellectual property issues, and research integrity challenges, and provide recommendations for both institutions and applicable federal agencies to streamline and clarify data retention standards.
Lye, C. T., Caron, M. M., Walsh, L., Bierer, B. E., & Barnes, M. (2025). Disparate data retention standards in biomedical research. Accountability in Research, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2025.2543884
Dr. Carla Saenz, Regional Advisor for Bioethics at the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), speaks with Willyanne DeCormier Plosky, MRCT Center Program Director, to unpack the clinical trial landscape in Latin America.
They discuss:
How demographics, healthcare infrastructure, and insurance models shape who can—and does—participate
Ethical and regulatory strategies to broaden inclusion
The influence of CIOMS and other international guidance on local trial ethics
Designing global studies that honor regional contexts without sacrificing scientific rigor
This episode highlights the critical need for equitable access and culturally responsive research in today’s global trial environment.
For more about the MRCT Center’s work on Global Representation in Clinical Trials, click here.
This guidance document is intended to be used as a tool to supplement the review, discussion, and deliberation of Research Ethics Committees reviewing clinical trial protocols.
This tool was developed by Barbara E. Bierer, MD (The MRCT Center of Brigham & Women’s Hospital and Harvard), Jeffrey D’Souza, PhD (University of Toronto), Caroline M. Kithinji, PhD (Kenya Medical Research Institute), and Winfred B. Nazziwa, MS (Uganda National Council for Science & Technology), in collaboration with the African Vaccines Regulatory Forum (AVAREF).
“Defamation Claims Arising from Research Misconduct Cases: Best Practices for Institutions,” published in the Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, co-authored by Barbara Bierer and Mark Barnes, as well as Nathaniel Jaffe, Minal Caron, and Lauren Walsh, analyzes nine instances in which defamation suits were employed to obstruct misconduct investigations. It summarizes the legal bases of such claims and key defenses (e.g., Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, truth, opinion), then distills institutional best practices—from calibrated public disclosures to stringent confidentiality protocols—to protect both scientific integrity and institutional resilience.
Jaffe N, Caron M, Walsh L, Bierer B, Barnes M. Defamation Claims Arising from Research Misconduct Cases: Best Practices for Institutions. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 2025;53(1):47-54. doi:10.1017/jme.2025.37
