Participants Reportedly Suffered Severe Chills
Transcription
Participants Reportedly Suffered Severe Chills
July 2006 This article is an excerpt from the July 2006 Biotech Briefing newsletter of the ABA Section of Science & Technology Law. Full copies of the newsletter may be obtained by calling the Section Office at 312/988-5599. Life Sciences Companies and Liability Insurance for Clinical Trials Conducted Abroad David T. Case, Julia Reynolds Johnson, and Anand D. Nair I. TGN1412: The Clinical Trial According to published reports, on March 13, 2006, eight men took part in a phase one clinical trial at a hospital in London. In particular, six of the men received doses of TGN1412, a monoclonal antibody developed by TeGenero AG (“TeGenero”), a German pharmaceutical company, and two were given a placebo.1 The hope was that TGN1412 would stimulate the immune system and could ultimately be used in the treatment of diseases such as leukemia, rheumatoid arthritis, and multiple sclerosis. Parexel International (“Parexel”), a U.S.-based company, was to administer the clinical trial. Reports also indicate that this was the first time that the experimental antibody had been tested on humans, although tests had been conducted on monkeys at a dose five hundred times greater than that at the clinical trial.2 Shortly after the drug was administered, participants reportedly suffered severe chills, pain, and nausea, as well as swelling of the head and body.3 As reported, TGN1412 had caused “cytokine release syndrome,” and the six individuals had suffered organ failure and complications.4 Reports further state that there are concerns of long-term damage, with the men susceptible to autoimmune diseases and tumors.5 II. Possible Claims The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”) investigated the trials and concluded that the harm to the participants was an “unexpected biological effect,” rather than the result of any human error in the manufacture, preparation, or administration of the drug.6 While it is unclear how the injured men will proceed, they have retained attorneys, and given the extent of injuries, TeGenero and Parexel could face claims.7 Reports state that TeGenero obtained a clinical trial liability insurance policy from Gerling Insurance, a German insurer. The policy reportedly has a £2 million policy limit, an amount which some doubt will be sufficient to compensate the six participants.8 It also appears that Parexel was insured under TeGenero’s policy.9 Although the MHRA did not find that any actions by Parexel contributed to the injuries, the attorney for four of the participants is said to be considering a claim against Parexel.10 Accordingly, it is possible that Parexel could face claims in the U.S., which raises additional coverage questions. Thus far, TeGenero’s insurers have reportedly paid at least four of the participants ƕ10,000 each.11 The events surrounding the TGN1412 clinical trial should be of interest to many life sciences companies based in the United States, highlighting issues concerning the conduct of a clinical trial and the nature of informed consent. to cover the trial.21 In addition, some countries, such as Norway, France, and Germany, require “admitted” insurance, meaning the policy must be written and issued by an insurer licensed to do business under the insurance laws of that jurisdiction.22 Even in jurisdictions that do not require clinical trial liability coverage, an IRB or comparable ethics committee may impose an insurance requirement.23 In such circumstances, policies addressing clinical trials may need to be modified by endorsement to provide coverage for the foreign trial. Moreover, policyholders must be aware that an insurer may sometimes place a cap on the amount of worldwide coverage for any particular drug or medical device.24 Finally, the policyholder must be aware that only a handful of insurers have entered the foreign clinical trials liability market, including Chubb, ACE, CNA and AIG.25 C. Possible Issues in Foreign Clinical Trial Insurance Policies No matter whether the policyholder is a sponsor, CRO, or investigator, the policy terms covering foreign clinical trials vary widely, and a policy must be reviewed carefully. Thus, with the advice of counsel, a life sciences company should compare coverages afforded by different insurers to determine which policy best meets the company’s particular needs. Although coverage issues will depend on specific policy language, one specimen policy form addressed clinical trials that cover “bodily injury and property damage in connection with a human clinical trial.”26 The specimen policy also defined a “human clinical trial” as the “[t]esting of material upon or within human beings to establish the effectiveness or safety of such material.” Moreover, the material being tested must be a “life science product,” which is defined as a “cosmetic, dietary supplement, drug or medical device.” Any policy will contain exclusions, and the policyholder, or its counsel, should review such exclusions carefully. For example, one policy form purports to exclude bodily injury or property damage occurring after a government or regulatory authority has: (1) placed the trial on hold; (2) withdrawn approval of an Investigational New Drug Application or Investigational Device Exception Application; or (3) ordered the trial to be discontinued. The policy form also defines a human clinical trial to include “[t]he providing of the information Time will tell if lawsuits are filed against TeGenero or Parexel, but the results of this clinical trial also underscore the need for insurance coverage analysis in the context of foreign clinical trials. III. The Increase in Foreign Clinical Trials Published statistics show that clinical trials are a critical part of the research and development budget for life sciences companies.12 Moreover, over the past few years, life sciences companies based in the United States have dramatically increased their use of foreign clinical trials.13 Commentators have posited several reasons for this growth, including a focus on treatments for conditions more common overseas;14 overseas venues that may offer more cost-effective trials;15 and foreign venues that may offer a quicker study approval time.16 Whatever the reason for the increase, foreign clinical trials are likely to continue to play an increasing role in the development of new medicines.17 IV. Insurance Coverage for Foreign Clinical Trials A. The Process and Parties As more companies conduct clinical trials abroad, each involved entity must be aware of the requirements concerning liability insurance in the country where the trial is being conducted. These involved entities should include the sponsor; any contract research organization (“CRO”) investigators conducting the trial; and any involved Institutional Review Board and its members (“IRB”). B. Selecting an Appropriate Insurer Certain threshold issues should be analyzed in assessing insurance coverage for clinical trials. An initial consideration is whether the jurisdiction where the trial will be held requires the sponsor to purchase insurance to cover the trial. Some countries, such as the United Kingdom, do not require clinical trial liability insurance.18 However, fifteen countries in Europe, including France, Germany, Spain, and Italy, require such insurance, and ten of those countries require specific policy terms.19 For example, Germany has a minimum limit of 500,000 euros per person, with a cap based on the number of participants in the trial, which could be as high as 15 million euros.20 Thus, in certain jurisdictions, a company conducting a clinical trial involving several hundred participants would need substantial policy limits 2 clinical trial liability coverage, at least for trials involving drugs not previously tested on humans.30 Depending on the resolution of the TeGenero trial and how much continued attention the story receives, insurers may increase premiums for all clinical trials. Notably, however, Gerling Insurance has indicated that it will not cease underwriting clinical trials as a result of the TeGenero incident.31 Second, there is speculation that the United Kingdom will move toward requiring insurance for all clinical trials.32 Indeed, the TeGenero trial may lead other countries to require insurance, or to establish or increase minimum policy limits for such coverage. And third, sponsors should be aware that insurers will almost certainly increase their scrutiny of potential insureds, and may, for example, review the informed consent form that would be used during the trial.33 VI. Conclusion Pursuing insurance coverage for foreign clinical trials will help address some of the financial and legal risks involved in conducting a clinical trial overseas. Yet, for a clear understanding of the scope of coverage, insurance policies must be carefully analyzed by the policyholder, broker, and counsel. David Case is a partner and Julia Reynolds Johnson is Of Counsel in the Washington, DC office of Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Nicholson Graham LLP (“K&LNG”). They regularly advise policyholders regarding insurance coverage issues. Anand Nair is a third-year law student at American University. The views expressed herein are not necessarily those of the clients of K&LNG. ____________________________ necessary to obtain the informed consent of human beings to participate in such testing; and other activities in connection with the testing” (emphasis supplied). Thus, to avoid potential coverage issues, life sciences companies should strive to ensure that the consent document is comprehensive, but understandable.27 The FDA has rules addressing informed consent, but a policyholder must carefully consider whether information on financial arrangements should be included. Looking only from the insurance perspective, trial participants must demonstrate consent through written documentation.28 Indeed, the TeGenero trial illustrates how issues of informed consent can impact coverage. In particular, according to reports, the relevant consent form apparently lists cytokine release syndrome as a risk, but at least one participant contends that there was little time to review the consent form before the trial began and that no one explained the risk of serious injury.29 The sample policy also has a separate sub-limit of liability for medical expenses for accidental bodily injury resulting from the trial. Such coverage applies, however, only to an accident occurring during the policy period, and, further, the expenses must be incurred and reported within one year of the accident. Furthermore, by its terms, the sample policy applies only if: 1. the insured makes all filings that the insured is required to make under all applicable laws and regulations and receives all necessary authorizations in connection therewith; 2. the trial is approved by the appropriate institutional review board or similar organization; and 3. the insured has not recklessly or willfully violated or consented to a violation of any agreement, contract, law, procedure, protocol or regulation applicable to the conduct of the trial. An entity purchasing this policy would want to be especially careful to make all necessary filings and to obtain the necessary approvals to avoid potential disputes with the insurer. V. Implications of the TeGenero Trial The TeGenero trial is already impacting insurance coverage at many levels. First, at the most basic level, one insurance broker has noted a 50% increase in insurance premiums for 1 Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, Investigations Into Adverse Incidents During Clinical Trials of TGN1412 [hereinafter MHRA Report], available at http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/idcplg?IdcService=GET_FI LE&dDocName=CON2023821&RevisionSelectionMethod=L atestReleased. 2 Elisabeth Rosenthal, When Drug Trials Go Horribly Wrong; Parexel Case Shocks Research World, Int’l Herald Trib., Apr. 8, 2006, at 1. 3 Victims of Drug Trial Get GBP 10k Handout, The Express, Apr. 28, 2006, at 23. 4 Frances Gibb, Drug Company Offers £ 5,000 If Victims of Trial Agree Not to Sue, The Times (London), Apr. 19, 2006, at 24. See also Rosenthal, supra note 2. 5 Clare Dyer, Medical Trial Victims Receive Interim Payouts, The Guardian (London), Apr. 28, 2006, at 7. 6 The MHRA concluded that “an unpredicted biological action of the drug in humans is the most likely cause of the adverse reactions in the trial participants.” See MHRA Report, supra note 1. See generally Nuala Moran, MHRA’s Report on TeGenero Trial: Mostly, Nothing Wrong, BioWorld Today, May 26, 2006. 3 Committee Leadership: Chair Erika Lietzan See Gibb, supra note 4. See Dyer, supra note 5. 9 We are not aware of any additional insurance policies covering Parexel, although it is possible that it has such insurance. 10 See Dyer, supra note 5. 11 Id. 12 Clinical Trials Consume 37% of Pharmaceutical R&D Spending, Obesity, Fitness & Wellness Week, July 24, 2004, at 659. 13 Id. 14 For example, numerous HIV/AIDS clinical trials take place in sub-Saharan Africa due to the high incidence of HIVinfected individuals. See Ester Chang, Fitting a Square Peg Into a Round Hole?: Imposing Informed Consent and PostTrial Obligations on United States Sponsored Clinical Trials in Developing Countries, 11 S. Cal. Interdisc. L.J. 339, 342 (2002). 15 See Clinical Trials in Low-Cost Countries Could Mean Huge Savings, Washington Drug Letter, Aug. 9, 2004. 16 Frank F. Goudsmit, Cesar Rios and Jill Wadlund, Insuring International Clinical Trials: Navigating the Quirks and Avoiding the Quagmires, J. Biolaw & Bus., Vol. 8, No. 3, 2005, available at http:// www.chubb.com/businesses/cci/chubb4242.pdf. 17 Id. 18 Id. 19 Id. 20 Id. See also Insurers in Drug Trial Rethink, Post Magazine, Apr. 20, 2006, at 3. 21 See Goudsmit, supra note 16. 22 Sullivan Group, 2004 Human Clinical Trials Primer, available at http://www.sullivangroup.com/news/publications. 23 See Goudsmit, supra note 16. 24 Id. See also ACE INA, ACE USA Introduces Foreign Clinical Trial Coverage to Respond to Growing Needs of U.S.Based Companies Conducting Clinical Trials Overseas, available at http://www.aceina.com/shownews.asp?ID=366. 25 See Sullivan Group, supra note 22. 26 Chubb Liability Insurance Policy Form 80-02-2085 (on file with author). 27 See Jill Wadlund, Heading Off a Clinical Trial Liability Lawsuit, Applied Clinical Trials, Vol. 12, No. 4, Apr. 2003, available at http://www.chubb.com/businesses/cci/chubb1165.pdf. 28 21 C.F.R. § 50.27 (2006). 29 See Rosenthal, supra note 2. See also TeGenero Trial Adverse Events Raise Safety, Consent Issues, Clinical Trials Advisor, Apr. 20, 2006. 30 Ed Vinales, Gerling Vows to Continue with Drug Trial Insurance, Post Magazine, May 4, 2006, at 1. 31 Id. 32 Insurers in Drug Trial Rethink, supra note 20. 33 Id. 7 8 Vice Chair Steve Hall Vice Chair Dan Pancamo Section of Science & Technology Law Officers: Chair Richard L. Field Chair-Elect William Sloan Coats Vice-Chair Gilbert F. Whittemore, Jr. Secretary Ruth Hill Bro Budget Officer Kimberly Kiefer Peretti Section Delegates to the House of Delegates Ellen J. Flannery Scott F. Partridge Immediate Past Chair Ivan K. Fong Past Chair Liaison to Officers Thomas J. Smedinghoff ©2006 American Bar Association. All rights reserved. Editorial policy: Biotech Briefing endeavors to provide information about current developments in law, science, medicine, and technology that is of professional interest to the members of the Biotechnology Committee of the ABA Section of Science & Technology Law. Material published in Biotech Briefing reflect the views of the authors and does not necessarily reflect the position of the ABA, the Section of Science & Technology Law, or the Editor(s). Membership questions or address changes? 1-800-285-2221 or abasvcctr@abanet.org 4