Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee - 2/4/91 
"I move that we give this protocol provisional approval, contingent upon 
the investigator bringing to the RAC an amended protocol defining how 
the homing experiments will be done, and an amended consent form to be 
consistent with that." 
He said this text clearly indicates a request for information on being able to determine 
in a semiquantitative way, the extent of specific homing of gene-marked TlLs to tumor. 
Dr. Harriman of the National Science Foundation asked whether it was possible to have 
the revised protocol FAXed from Pittsburgh over the luncheon recess so that the 
committee could have the option to be able to deal with it during the meeting. Dr. 
Lotze agreed to do this if the committee thought this were an option. 
Dr. R. Murray clarified that it was unfair to limit review only to the portions dealing with 
recombinant DNA, in that it was a portion of an overall protocol which could not be 
taken out of context. It would be necessary to see a revised complete protocol. 
Dr. Mclvor suggested that if the protocol is deferred, that it be sent back through the 
HGTS, so that at the next RAC meeting a much more thorough evaluation could be 
presented in terms of the changes that were being requested. 
Dr. Walters felt a bit guilty in that, as a reviewer, he had not begun his review earlier at 
a time when he could have advised Dr. Lotze that he needed to submit the revised 
protocol. Dr. Lotze said that it was his own responsibility and that if the committee 
would wish to see the revised protocol, he could have it FAXed over the lunch hour. 
Dr. R. Murray felt it not necessary for the protocol to go back to the HGTS. However, 
he offered a substitute motion to Dr. Gellert's motion to defer. Dr. R. Murray moved 
that he wished to "change Dr. Gellert's motion to say that we would review the materials 
as soon as they were available" and to exclude the words "next meeting" in Dr. R. 
Gellert's motion. 
Dr. McGarrity asked Dr. Gellert if he would accept such a change in wording. Dr. 
Gellert agreed provided the changes were such that they could be reviewed in a finite 
time. 
Dr. R. Murray reminded the Chair that his motion was made as a substitute motion, 
rather than a friendly amendment, although if Dr. Gellert were to reword his motion he 
would withdraw the motion for a substitute motion. 
Dr. Atlas seconded Dr. R. Murray's motion. 
[470] 
Recombinant DNA Research, Volume 14 
