[Conference Materials, Panel to Review GP-160 Vaccine Candidate (1992: Bethesda, Maryland)]
[ )LPARTMI"ENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public tH,,tc "uI National Institutes of.. Bethesda, Maryland 20t92 Charles C.J. Carpenter, M.D. Professor of Medicine T 2 8 Brown University The Miriam Hospital 164 Summit Avenue Providence, Rhode Island 02906 Dear Dr. Carpenter: The Fiscal Year 1993 Department of Defense (DOD) Appropriation (P.L. 102-396) identifies $20 million for AIDS research and specifically states that the funds may be used for GP-160 vaccine trials unless "the Secretary of Defense, the Director of the National Institutes of Health, and the Commissioner of Food and Drugs submit to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives a written certification containing a determination of such officials that the large-scale Phase III clinical investigation should not proceed, the reasons for that determination, and an assessment of the GP-160 vaccine." In response to this directive, Dr. Bernadine Healy, Director, I1Hi is convening a meeting of outside experts, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the DOD to provide recommendations to the NIH Advisory Committee to the Director (ACD) regarding the scientific merits of a large-scale clinical investigation of the MicroGeneSys GP-160 vaccine candidate in HIV seropositive individuals. Specifically, we would like you to consider the following questions in formulating your advice: 1. What is the ourrent scientific assessment of the MicroGeneSys GP-160 vaccine candidate as a therapeutic agent? 2. Based on the scientific merit of the GP-160 vaccine should a large-scale efficacy trial be initiated at this time in HIV seropositive individuals? 3. Since no formal protocol is available at this time, what should be the role of NIH over the next six months in reviewing potential protocol designs? 4. Should consideration be given to including several promising vaccine candidates in a large-scale comparative efficacy trial? Are additional candidates ready for Phase III testing? What would be the objective, rationale and optimum design of such a comparative trial?
About this Item
- Title
- [Conference Materials, Panel to Review GP-160 Vaccine Candidate (1992: Bethesda, Maryland)]
- Author
- National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
- Canvas
- Page 1
- Publication
- 1992-11-05
- Subject terms
- press kits
- Series/Folder Title
- Government Response and Policy > Law > gp160 trials and controversy > National Institute of Health (U.S.) GP160 Meeting, Blue-Ribbon Panel (1992)
- Item type:
- press kits
Technical Details
- Collection
- Jon Cohen AIDS Research Collection
- Link to this Item
-
https://name.umdl.umich.edu/5571095.0463.003
- Link to this scan
-
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cohenaids/5571095.0463.003/32
Rights and Permissions
The University of Michigan Library provides access to these materials for educational and research purposes, with permission from their copyright holder(s). If you decide to use any of these materials, you are responsible for making your own legal assessment and securing any necessary permission.
Related Links
IIIF
- Manifest
-
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/api/manifest/cohenaids:5571095.0463.003
Cite this Item
- Full citation
-
"[Conference Materials, Panel to Review GP-160 Vaccine Candidate (1992: Bethesda, Maryland)]." In the digital collection Jon Cohen AIDS Research Collection. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/5571095.0463.003. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 10, 2025.