CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - At least three possible COVID-19 vaccines, including from Cambridge biotech firm Moderna, have seen promising results in Phase One trials. And some experts think infecting volunteers with the virus that causes COVID-19 may be worthwhile to speed vaccine development.

They believe so-called "human challenge trials" on a small number of young, healthy participants could partially replace a later phase of vaccine trials.

Dr. Zeb Jamrozik is a bioethicist at Monash University in Australia and member of the World Health Organization's working group on human challenge studies in COVID-19. He thinks if no current vaccine candidate passes a Phase Three trial in the next six to 12 months, this approach could be considered.

"If we don't have one that's been shown to be efficacious, then I think it's extremely likely that challenge studies are going to be on the table," says Jamrozik. "And that they might even be the best way to test the remaining candidates as efficiently as possible."

But human challenge trials are controversial - infecting participants in this case with the new coronavirus, which has limited treatments and can be fatal. Still, 35 members of Congress - including Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton (D - Salem) and Rep. Stephen Lynch (D - Boston) - support the idea for COVID-19.

A new nonprofit known as "1 Day Sooner" has quickly signed up close to 25,000 people willing to participate in human challenge trials for a COVID-19 vaccine. The group's founder, attorney Josh Morrison, says many might think of him and other volunteers as selfless - but he disagrees.

"It makes my life quite a bit better to be doing this than what I was doing before, of just like sitting in my apartment in Brooklyn, not having a lot of work to do," says Morrison. "Feeling just miserable and scared, especially for my parents' health. Trying to be part of the solution, that's made my life a lot better."

Morrison explains that, for young, healthy volunteers, the risk is comparable to donating a kidney - something he did close to a decade ago. He thinks if it shaves months off the COVID-19 vaccine trials, the risk would be worth it.

Beyond the ethical considerations and regulatory approvals, cost is another big barrier. Jamrozik says this type of research can only be conducted at a small number of bio-secure facilities, and volunteers need to be isolated and under observation for months.

"There's significant set-up costs that are larger than a Phase Three field trial, in the sense that you need to build a strain," says Jamrozik.

In other words, they must also create a dose of the coronavirus to infect the volunteers with, which isn't cheap. However, if it ends up helping shorten the time to market, Jamrozik says it could save time and money.


get more stories like this via email

After more than 50 years of use, some Michigan lawmakers say naloxone may not be the best choice in an overdose situation.

Naloxone is sometimes called the "Lazarus drug" because of its powerful ability to seemingly resurrect people after a drug overdose.

Sen. Kevin Hertel, D-St. Clair Shores, and some of his colleagues have introduced a bill which would open the door for what they say are more costly, but more powerful, antidotes.

"Given the prevalence of fentanyl in our communities, and how much stronger some of these drugs that we're now seeing are, we believe -- and in talking with others -- that there should be other tools to respond to an overdose," Hertel explained. "To make sure we're doing everything we can to save somebody's life."

Not everyone is on board with the proposed legislation, Senate Bill 542. Opponents argued the more expensive naloxone alternatives are not necessary, and using them would only increase profits for the pharmaceutical industry.

Jonathan Stoltman, director of the Opioid Policy Institute in Grand Rapids, said while the naloxone alternatives do help in overdose situations, they can also cause nasty side effects.

"The newer approaches, they put people into more severe withdrawal," Stoltman pointed out. "That's a pretty profound negative side effect. The one approach is very inexpensive and works great; the other approach is far more expensive and has this strong negative side effect."

Sponsors of the bill say they're hoping to give Michigan residents a chance to chime in on the issue in a public hearing sometime in June. Michigan saw more than 3,000 opioid overdose deaths in 2021.


get more stories like this via email

New Mexico saw record enrollment numbers for the Affordable Care Act this year and is now setting its sights on lowering out-of-pocket costs - those not reimbursed by insurance. More than 56,000 New Mexicans are enrolled in a medical health insurance plan on the state exchange - an increase of 12,000 people overall.

Colin Baillio, deputy superintendent with the state's Office of Insurance, said the state has boosted its outreach and made efforts to improve the overall consumer experience.

"We saw a 40% year-over-year increase, and New Mexico saw the biggest percentage increase during the open-enrollment period among all of the state-based marketplaces," he explained

Part of the enrollment increase is due to what's called the "unwinding" - a federal directive that required all states to redetermine Medicaid eligibility following a three-year pause on checks during the COVID pandemic. He said by using expanded tools made available by the federal and state government, 8% of New Mexico's population is now uninsured - down from 23% in 2010.

Following approval by lawmakers in the 2024 legislative session, the New Mexico governor signed seven health care-related bills into law - one of which requires annual reporting of prescription drug pricing. Baililo said the Affordable Care Act built the foundation that has allowed the state to pursue additional affordability initiatives.

"I'm really glad to see that there's so much interest in the next step of health reform, really leaning into these out-of-pocket cost issues and making it easier for people to afford to stay covered and see their doctors," he continued.

Two years ago, the state also passed a one-of-a-kind law that did away with behavioral health co-pays for people in certain insurance plans.

New York's medical aid-in-dying bill is gaining further support. The Medical Society of the State of New York is supporting the bill. New York's bill allows terminally ill people with only six months to live to use this option, with safeguards requiring two physicians' approval.

The bill's Assembly sponsor Amy Paulin, D-Westchester, said despite the growing support, other hurdles lie ahead.

"Now we have what I believe, if it came to the floor, a majority. There's still a hesitation on the part of leadership. You know, we need members to assure leadership that they no longer have reservations," she said.

Other newly resolved concerns center on making sure insurance companies and doctors who don't support this aren't held liable. She's optimistic the bill will pass after nine years in the Legislature. New York would be the 11th state along with Washington, D.C. to have medical aid in dying legislation.

Corinne Carey, senior New York campaign director with Compassion and Choices finds the pandemic drew a vivid picture of a person's end-of-life experience. There were images of people dying on ventilators, apart from loved ones, and unable to communicate. She said people began thinking about a "good death."

"And, what is a good death is being surrounded by loved ones, having some measure of control, experiencing the touch of your loved ones, and being the one in the driver's seat," she explained.

Now people have different options for end-of-life care, each of which presents various challenges. Polls show medical aid in dying has garnered considerable support since being introduced in 2015. A 2022 Compassion and Choices poll finds 57% of nurses support medical aid in dying professionally, although fewer support it personally.