Cell and gene therapy knowledge and attitude among undergraduate pharmacy students in Malaysia: A cross- sectional study
A cross-sectional study of 357 undergraduate pharmacy students in Malaysia reveals that while students hold generally positive attitudes toward cell and gene therapy, their knowledge remains moderate with specific gaps in regulatory and local clinical aspects, underscoring the need to enhance CGT content in pharmacy curricula.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
Imagine a new kind of medicine that does not just treat symptoms but rewrites the very instructions inside a person's body to cure disease. This is the promise of cell and gene therapy. Instead of giving a patient a pill that sits in the bloodstream, doctors might use a virus to deliver a healthy copy of a broken gene, or they might take a patient's own immune cells, train them in a lab to hunt down cancer, and put them back in. These treatments are changing how we think about curing illnesses that were once considered impossible to beat. However, for these therapies to work safely, the people who manage them—pharmacists—must understand exactly how they function, how to store them, and how to explain the risks and benefits to patients. If the next generation of pharmacists does not know enough about these complex treatments, the patients who need them most could be left without proper care.
A team of researchers in Malaysia set out to see if the country's future pharmacists were ready for this shift. They surveyed 357 undergraduate pharmacy students from universities across the nation to test what they knew about these advanced therapies and how they felt about them. The students were asked to answer questions about basic concepts, such as how gene therapy works, as well as specific details about the rules and regulations in Malaysia. They were also asked to share their opinions on whether these treatments should be used, if they are safe, and if pharmacists have a duty to teach patients about them. The goal was to find out if the students' education was keeping pace with the rapid advances in medicine.
The results showed a clear picture of a generation that is optimistic but not yet fully prepared. The students generally held a very positive view of cell and gene therapy. Most agreed that these treatments would become a vital part of healthcare and that they should be available to adults and children with serious, life-threatening diseases. They recognized the potential to save lives, even while expressing valid concerns about the high cost of these treatments and the dangers of unapproved products being sold to the public. Despite this enthusiasm, their actual knowledge was only moderate. On a test of seventeen questions, the average student scored just over half the points. While most could correctly identify that gene therapy uses genes to treat disease and that cell therapy involves introducing new cells to repair tissue, they struggled with the specifics.
The gaps in knowledge were most noticeable when it came to the local context. Very few students knew that Malaysia had approved only a single gene therapy product for clinical use, or that this specific treatment was intended for children. Many were unsure about which government agency is responsible for approving these drugs or whether these therapies are currently available outside of research settings. This suggests that while the students understand the broad idea of these therapies, they lack the detailed, practical information needed to work with them in a real-world pharmacy. The study also found that students who were in their final years of study or who had already taken a class on the topic knew more and felt more positive than those in their first year. This indicates that knowledge grows with exposure and time, but the current curriculum may not be providing enough of that exposure early on.
Perhaps most importantly, the researchers found that knowing more about these therapies did not automatically make students feel more positive about them. A student with a high score on the knowledge test was not significantly more likely to have a strong positive attitude than a student with a lower score. This suggests that feelings about these treatments are shaped by many things, such as personal values, concerns about safety, and worries about cost, not just by facts. The students' concerns were not signs of rejection but rather signs of professional caution. They worried about the safety of unregistered products and the ethics of changing human genes, which are exactly the kinds of questions a responsible pharmacist should be asking.
The study concludes that while Malaysian pharmacy students are eager to embrace the future of medicine, their education needs to catch up. The researchers suggest that universities should weave more information about cell and gene therapy into the standard undergraduate courses, rather than waiting until students become specialists. By teaching them not just the science, but also the regulations, the ethics, and the practical steps of handling these drugs, schools can ensure that when these students graduate, they will be ready to guide patients safely through this new era of medicine. The students are ready to learn; the curriculum just needs to provide the path.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.