Literature DB >> 10638485

Ethical issues in the development of new agents.

C K Daugherty1.   

Abstract

In the early drug development process for cancer therapy, several ethical dilemmas result from the use of cancer patients with advanced disease as the subjects of research in clinical trials studying agents of unknown toxicity and/or efficacy. Although several accepted ethical principles guide the behavior of involved physicians and investigators, many of these principles are allowed to be violated in order to achieve the overall goal of clinical research in improving medical care for future patients. Informed consent has been a process viewed by many as a mechanism which protects potentially vulnerable patients from harm in the clinical trial process. However, the ability of the traditionally regulated process of obtaining informed consent for clinical research may be inadequate to ensure appropriate understanding of the purposes and the goals of early clinical trial research by potentially vulnerable advanced cancer patients. This creates further dilemmas with regard to physician-investigator and patient-subject communications. In the setting of phase I trials, where the specific goal of the research is to obtain toxicity information regarding a new potential anticancer agent, many heightened ethical conflicts are present. The fact that patients do not participate in these studies as a result of altruism, and that their main goals of participation are intensely therapeutic, create issues that may be in direct conflict with the research purpose of phase I trials. As well, the presence of therapeutic intentions on the part of involved physician-investigators creates challenging issues when one realizes the very low likelihood of benefit for individual patients participating in these studies. Within the phase II setting, the statistical constraints placed on new drug trials and, again, the low likelihood of benefit for participating-subjects, also creates challenging dilemmas. These statistical requirements may be in direct conflict with involved clinicians' attitudes and beliefs regarding potential efficacy of an agent in this setting. As well, these issues become problematic when thinking about the desired structure and outcome for informed consent in phase II anticancer trials. The ability to conduct clinical research on advanced cancer patients using agents of unknown efficacy and toxicity is a daunting privilege granted to physicians and accompanying institutions. The weight of this privilege should not be underestimated, and involved physician-investigators should be aware of the significant ethical challenges involved in appropriately and successfully conducting this form of research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10638485     DOI: 10.1023/a:1006371200296

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest New Drugs        ISSN: 0167-6997            Impact factor:   3.850


  46 in total

1.  Institutional Review Board (IRB) review lacks impact on the readability of consent forms for research.

Authors:  D E Hammerschmidt; M A Keane
Journal:  Am J Med Sci       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 2.378

Review 2.  Informed consent in clinical trials.

Authors:  F W Verheggen; F C van Wijmen
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 2.980

3.  How reliable are relatives' retrospective reports of terminal illness? Patients and relatives' accounts compared.

Authors:  J Hinton
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 4.634

4.  Ethical problems in clinical trials.

Authors:  K F Schaffner
Journal:  J Med Philos       Date:  1986-11

5.  An optimal three-stage design for phase II clinical trials.

Authors:  L G Ensign; E A Gehan; D S Kamen; P F Thall
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1994-09-15       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Impact of therapeutic research on informed consent and the ethics of clinical trials: a medical oncology perspective.

Authors:  C K Daugherty
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Clinical drug development: an analysis of phase II trials, 1970-1985.

Authors:  S Marsoni; D Hoth; R Simon; B Leyland-Jones; M De Rosa; R E Wittes
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rep       Date:  1987-01

8.  Therapeutic response in phase I trials of antineoplastic agents.

Authors:  E Estey; D Hoth; R Simon; S Marsoni; B Leyland-Jones; R Wittes
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rep       Date:  1986-09

9.  Informed consent for phase I studies: evaluation of quantity and quality of information provided to patients.

Authors:  M Tomamichel; C Sessa; S Herzig; J de Jong; O Pagani; Y Willems; F Cavalli
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 32.976

10.  Design and results of phase I cancer clinical trials: three-year experience at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center.

Authors:  T L Smith; J J Lee; H M Kantarjian; S S Legha; M N Raber
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  4 in total

1.  Phase I oncology studies: evidence that in the era of targeted therapies patients on lower doses do not fare worse.

Authors:  Rajul K Jain; J Jack Lee; David Hong; Maurie Markman; Jing Gong; Aung Naing; Jennifer Wheler; Razelle Kurzrock
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2010-02-09       Impact factor: 12.531

2.  Change in tumor size by RECIST correlates linearly with overall survival in phase I oncology studies.

Authors:  Rajul K Jain; J Jack Lee; Chaan Ng; David Hong; Jing Gong; Aung Naing; Jennifer Wheler; Razelle Kurzrock
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-06-11       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Do cancer patients fully understand clinical trial participation? A pilot study to assess informed consent and patient expectations.

Authors:  Ricardo J Wray; Jo Ellen Stryker; Eric Winer; George Demetri; Karen M Emmons
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.037

4.  Phase I and Pharmacokinetic Study of Romidepsin in Patients with Cancer and Hepatic Dysfunction: A National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group Study.

Authors:  Roisin M Connolly; Eric Laille; Ulka Vaishampayan; Vincent Chung; Karen Kelly; Afshin Dowlati; Olatunji B Alese; R Donald Harvey; Paul Haluska; Lillian L Siu; Shivaani Kummar; Richard Piekarz; S Percy Ivy; Nicole M Anders; Melinda Downs; Ashley O'Connor; Angela Scardina; Jacqueline Saunders; Gary L Rosner; Michael A Carducci; Michelle A Rudek
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2020-08-14       Impact factor: 12.531

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.