Literature DB >> 27413698

Ethical challenges in conducting clinical research in lung cancer.

Peter Allmark1, Angela M Tod1.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The article examines ethical challenges that arise with clinical lung cancer research focusing on design, recruitment, conduct and dissemination.
DESIGN: problems related to equipoise can arise in lung cancer studies. Equipoise is an ethics precondition for RCTs and exists where there is insufficient evidence to decide which of two or more treatments is best. Difficulties arise in deciding what level of uncertainty constitutes equipoise and who should be in equipoise, for example, patients might not be even where clinicians are. Patient and public involvement (PPI) can reduce but not remove the problems. Recruitment: (I) lung cancer studies can be complex, making it difficult to obtain good quality consent. Some techniques can help, such as continuous consent. But researchers should not expect consent to be the sole protection for participants' welfare. This protection is primarily done elsewhere in the research process, for example, in ethics review; (II) the problem of desperate volunteers: some patients only consent to a trial because it gives them a 50/50 option of the treatment they want and can be disappointed or upset if randomised to the other arm. This is not necessarily unfair, given clinical equipoise. However, it should be avoided where possible, for example, by using alternative trial designs; (III) the so-called problem of therapeutic misconception: this is the idea that patients are mistaken if they enter trials believing this to be in their clinical best interest. We argue the problem is misconceived and relates only to certain health systems. Conduct: lung cancer trials face standard ethical challenges with regard to trial conduct. PPI could be used in decisions about criteria for stopping rules. DISSEMINATION: as in other trial areas, it is important that all results, including negative ones, are reported. We argue also that the role of PPI with regard to dissemination is currently under-developed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Research ethics; lung neoplasms; therapeutic equipoise; therapeutic misconception; vulnerable populations

Year:  2016        PMID: 27413698      PMCID: PMC4931131          DOI: 10.21037/tlcr.2016.03.04

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res        ISSN: 2218-6751


  38 in total

1.  Obtaining informed consent to neonatal randomised controlled trials: interviews with parents and clinicians in the Euricon study.

Authors:  S A Mason; P J Allmark
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-12-16       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Zelen randomization: attitudes of parents participating in a neonatal clinical trial.

Authors:  C Snowdon; D Elbourne; J Garcia
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1999-04

Review 3.  Research ethics committees and public dissemination of clinical trial results.

Authors:  Howard Mann
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-08-03       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Patient preferences and randomised clinical trials.

Authors:  C R Brewin; C Bradley
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-07-29

5.  Patient and public involvement.

Authors:  D Stewart; R Wilson; P Selby; J Darbyshire
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 32.976

6.  Clinical trial participation improves outcome: a matched historical cohort study.

Authors:  John R Baker; Alain C Vandal; Joey Yeoh; Irene Zeng; Selwyn Wong; Stuart N Ryan
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 2.486

Review 7.  Are randomized clinical trials good for us (in the short term)? Evidence for a "trial effect".

Authors:  D A Braunholtz; S J Edwards; R J Lilford
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 6.437

8.  As depressing as it was predictable? Lung cancer, clinical trials, and the Medical Research Council in postwar Britain.

Authors:  Carsten Timmermann
Journal:  Bull Hist Med       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 1.314

9.  'Are smokers less deserving of expensive treatment? A randomised controlled trial that goes beyond official values'.

Authors:  Joar Björk; Niels Lynøe; Niklas Juth
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2015-05-04       Impact factor: 2.652

10.  Clinical trials in cancer: the role of surrogate patients in defining what constitutes an ethically acceptable clinical experiment.

Authors:  W J Mackillop; M J Palmer; B O'Sullivan; G K Ward; R Steele; G Dotsikas
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  1 in total

1.  Willingness to participate in HIV research at the end of life (EOL).

Authors:  Katya Prakash; Sara Gianella; Karine Dubé; Jeff Taylor; GaYoung Lee; Davey M Smith
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 3.240

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.