Literature DB >> 25573671

The complexity of consenting to clinical research in phase I pediatric cancer studies.

Tal Schechter1, Ronald Grant.   

Abstract

The principal aim of phase I studies is to define the recommended dosing of drugs for phase II studies through assessment of drug pharmacokinetics and observation of the drug's toxicity profile. In the setting of pediatric oncology, the use of an experimental drug in phase I study is offered when prognosis is poor. Thus, phase I oncology studies are not given to patients with a primary purpose of an intent to cure. They may offer little to no treatment benefit and carry a potential toxic effect. They may offer other benefits such as improved quality of life and relief of pain, however. Three parties are involved in the informed consent process: the parents, patients, and physicians. Families report hope as the main cause for enrollment. Physicians focus on providing information so families can decide about participation. Physicians also try to maintain hope despite understanding the nature of the disease. This makes the informed consent complicated for all parties involved in the process. The purpose of this review is to discuss the aims of phase I studies in pediatric oncology and to convey the ethical challenges that patients, parents, and physicians are facing when discussing informed consent with potential study participants.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25573671     DOI: 10.1007/s40272-014-0113-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Paediatr Drugs        ISSN: 1174-5878            Impact factor:   3.022


  25 in total

1.  The ethics of phase I pediatric oncology trials.

Authors:  Terrence F Ackerman
Journal:  IRB       Date:  1995 Jan-Feb

2.  Phase I oncology trials: why the therapeutic misconception will not go away.

Authors:  W Glannon
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  The therapeutic misconception: informed consent in psychiatric research.

Authors:  P S Appelbaum; L H Roth; C Lidz
Journal:  Int J Law Psychiatry       Date:  1982

4.  Informed consent for pediatric phase 1 cancer trials: physicians' perspectives.

Authors:  Tsiao Yi Yap; Amy D Yamokoski; Sabahat Hizlan; Stephen J Zyzanski; Anne L Angiolillo; Susan R Rheingold; Justin N Baker; Eric D Kodish
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-07-01       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Health-related quality of life and enrollment in phase 1 trials in children with incurable cancer.

Authors:  Maru Barrera; Norma D'Agostino; Janet Gammon; Lynlee Spencer; Sylvain Baruchel
Journal:  Palliat Support Care       Date:  2005-09

6.  Responses and toxic deaths in phase I clinical trials.

Authors:  G Decoster; G Stein; E E Holdener
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 32.976

7.  Toxicity and outcome of children and adolescents participating in phase I/II trials of novel anticancer drugs: the Royal Marsden experience.

Authors:  Daniel A Morgenstern; Darren Hargrave; Lynley V Marshall; Susanne A Gatz; Giuseppe Barone; Tracey Crowe; Kathy Pritchard-Jones; Stergios Zacharoulis; Donna L Lancaster; Sucheta J Vaidya; Julia C Chisholm; Andrew D J Pearson; Lucas Moreno
Journal:  J Pediatr Hematol Oncol       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 1.289

8.  Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials, 1991 through 2002.

Authors:  Elizabeth Horstmann; Mary S McCabe; Louise Grochow; Seiichiro Yamamoto; Larry Rubinstein; Troy Budd; Dale Shoemaker; Ezekiel J Emanuel; Christine Grady
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-03-03       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  "Trying to be a good parent" as defined by interviews with parents who made phase I, terminal care, and resuscitation decisions for their children.

Authors:  Pamela S Hinds; Linda L Oakes; Judy Hicks; Brent Powell; Deo Kumar Srivastava; Sheri L Spunt; Joann Harper; Justin N Baker; Nancy K West; Wayne L Furman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-10-05       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Physician perceptions and beliefs of phase I trials in pediatric oncology.

Authors:  Margaux B Gilliam; Avi Madan-Swain; Julia M Adams; Joseph G Pressey
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2013-03-19       Impact factor: 3.167

View more
  4 in total

1.  Validity and Reliability of the Pediatric Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

Authors:  Bryce B Reeve; Molly McFatrich; Jennifer W Mack; Scott H Maurer; Shana S Jacobs; David R Freyer; Janice S Withycombe; Justin N Baker; Sharon M Castellino; Li Lin; Nicole R Lucas; Pamela S Hinds
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Creating a new ethical climate for drug research in children and pregnant women.

Authors:  Doreen Matsui; Gideon Koren
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.022

3.  Impact of pharmacogenetics on variability in exposure to oral vinorelbine among pediatric patients: a model-based population pharmacokinetic analysis.

Authors:  Mourad Hamimed; Pierre Leblond; Aurélie Dumont; Florence Gattacceca; Emmanuelle Tresch-Bruneel; Alicia Probst; Pascal Chastagner; Anne Pagnier; Emilie De Carli; Natacha Entz-Werlé; Jacques Grill; Isabelle Aerts; Didier Frappaz; Anne-Isabelle Bertozzi-Salamon; Caroline Solas; Nicolas André; Joseph Ciccolini
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  2022-06-25       Impact factor: 3.288

Review 4.  Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Modeling in Pediatric Drug Development, and the Importance of Standardized Scaling of Clearance.

Authors:  Eva Germovsek; Charlotte I S Barker; Mike Sharland; Joseph F Standing
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 5.577

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.