Phase I cancer trials. A collusion of misunderstanding

Hasting Center Report

Volumn 30, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 34-43

  Miller, Matthew ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; COMPREHENSION; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; EMPATHY; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; HUMAN RELATION; INFORMED CONSENT; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MEDICAL ETHICS; MOTIVATION; NEOPLASM; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT SELECTION; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; RESEARCH SUBJECT; STANDARD; UNITED STATES;

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH;

CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I; COMPREHENSION; DISCLOSURE; EMPATHY; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; ETHICS, MEDICAL; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; MOTIVATION; NEOPLASMS; NONTHERAPEUTIC HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT SELECTION; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; RESEARCH SUBJECTS; RESEARCHER-SUBJECT RELATIONS; TRUTH DISCLOSURE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0034220056     PISSN: 00930334     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3527646     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. J. Katz, "Human Experimentation and Human Rights," St. Louis University Law Journal 38, no. 7 (1993): 7-54..
2. M.J. Ratain et al., "Statistical and Ethical Issues in the Design and Conduct of Phase I and II Clinical Trials of New Anticancer Agents," Journal of the National Cancer Institute 85 (1993): 1637-43;
3. B. Fisher, "Clinical Trials for the Evaluation of Cancer Therapy" Cancer 54 (1984): 2609-17;
4. M.J. Hawkins, "Early Cancer Clinical Trials: Safety, Numbers, and Consent," Journal of the National Cancer Institute 85 (1993): 1618-19.
5. R. Levine, Ethics and Regulation of Clinical Research, second ed. (Baltimore, Md.: Urban and Schwarzberg, 1986);
6. B. Blackwell, "For the First Time in Man" Clinical Pharmacology Therapeutics 13 (1972): 812-23.
7. J. Arnold, "Alternatives to the Use of Prisoners in Research in the United States," in Research Involving Prisoners: Report and Recommendations (Washington, D.C.: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1976), appendix, pp 8.1-8.18.
8. D. Azarnoff, "Physiologic Factors in Selecting Human Volunteers for Drug Studies," Clinical Pharmacology Therapeutics 13 (1972): 796-802.
9. E. Frei, "Clinical Trials of Antitumor Agents: Experimental Design and Timeline Considerations," Scientific American, The Cancer Journal 3 (1997): 127-36;
10. B. Storer, "Design and Analysis of Phase I Clinical Trials," Biometrics 45 (1989): 925-37;
11. N.L. Geller, "Design of Phase I and II Clinical Trials in Cancer: A Statistician's View," Cancer Investigations 2 (1984): 483-91.
12. D. Von Hoff and J. Turner, "Response Rates, Duration of Response, and Dose Response Effects in Phase I Studies of Antineoplastics," Investigatory New Drugs 9 (1991): 115-22.
13. V. DeVita, Principles and Practice of Oncology, fifth ed., ed. V. DeVita et al., (Philadelphia, Penn.: Lippincott, 1997);
14. S. Arbuck, "Workshop on Phase I Study Design," Annals of Oncology 7 (1996): 567-73.
15. See ref. 2, Fisher, "Clinical Trials."
16. G. Decoster et al., "Responses and Toxic Deaths in Phase I Clinical Trials," Annals of Oncology 1 (1990): 175-81.
17. See ref. 10, G. Decoster et al., "Responses and Toxic Deaths."
18. R. Mick and M. J. Ratain, "Model-guided Determination of Maximum Tolerated Dose in Phase I Clinical Trials: Evidence For Increased Precision," Journal of the National Cancer Institute 85 (1993): 217-23.
19. Von Hoff and Turner, "Response Rates";
20. E. Estay et al., "Therapeutic Response in Phase I Trials of Antineoplastic Agents," Cancer Treatment Reports 70 (1986): 1105-15;
21. T.L. Smith et al.,"Design and Results of Phase I Cancer Clinical Trials: Three-year Experience at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center," Journal of Clinical Oncology 14 (1996): 287-95.
22. L. Janisch et al., "Prognostic Factors for Survival in Patients Treated in Phase I Clinical Trials," Cancer 74 (1994): 1965-73.
23. D. Von Hoff, "Is Response in Phase I Trials a Useful Predictor for the Future Clinical Activity of a New Agent?" Proceedings of the 9th NCI-EORTC Symposium on New Drugs in Cancer Therapy, Amsterdam, 12-15 March 1996.
24. C.K. Daugherty et al., "Pushing the Envelope: Informed Consent in Phase I Trials," Annals of Oncology 6 (1995): 321-23;
25. M. Schaeffer et al., "The Impact of Disease Severity on the Informed Consent Process in Clinical Research," American Journal of Medicine 100 (1996): 261-68.
26. E. Kodish et al., "Ethical Issues in Phase I Oncology Research: A Comparison of Investigators and Institutional Review Board Chairpersons," Journal of Clinical Oncology 10 (1992): 1810-16.
27. See ref. 16, Daugherty et al., "Pushing the Envelope."
28. See ref. 6, Frei, "Clinical Trials of Antitumor Agents," p. 128.
29. S. Sontag, Illness as Metaphor (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1978), p. 87.
30. J. Katz, The Silent World of Doctor and Patient (New York, N.Y.: The Free Press, 1984);
31. N.M. King, "Experimental Treatment: Oxymoron or Aspiration," Hastings Center Report 25, no. 4 (1995): 6-15;
32. P.S. Appelbaum et al., "False Hopes and Best Data: Consent to Research and the Therapeutic Misconception," Hastings Center Report 17, no. 2 (1987): 20-24.
33. S. Arbuck, "Workshop on Phase I Study Design," Annals of Oncology 7 (1996): 567-73;
34. also J. Quigley, "Estimating the Probability of Toxicity at the Recommended Dose Following a Phase I Clinical Trial in Cancer," Biometrics 48 (1992): 853-62 [erratum appears in Biometrics 50(1) (1994):322];
35. R. Simon et al., "Accelerated Titration Designs for Phase I Clinical Trials in Oncology," Journal of the National Cancer Institute 89 (1997): 1138-47.
36. S. Dent and E. Eisenhauer, "Phase I Trial Design: Are New Methodoiogies Being Put into Practice?" Annals of Oncology 7 (1996): 561-66,
37. and ref. 6, Frei, "Clinical Trials of Antitumor Agents."
38. See ref. 16, Daugherty et al., "Pushing the Envelope."
39. See ref. 16, Daugherty et al., "Pushing the Envelope,"
40. C. K. Daugherty et al., "Study of Cohort-Specific Consent and Patient Control in Phase I Cancer Trials," Journal of Clinical Oncology 16 (1998): 2305-12;
41. W.E. Berdel et al., "Influence of Phase I Early Clinical Trials on the Quality of Life of Cancer Patients: A Pilot Study," Anticancer Research 8 (1988): 313-21;
42. M. Tomamichell et al., "Informed Consent for Phase I Studies: Evaluation of the Information Provided to Patients," Annals of Oncology 6 (1995): 363-369.
43. H. Jonas, "Philosophical Reflections on Human Experimentation," Daedalus (1969): 219-45.
44. See ref. 16, Schaeffer et al., "The Impact of Disease Severity";
45. ref. 21, Appelbaum et al., "The Therapeutic Misconception,"
46. and Appelbaum et al. "False Hopes and Best Data";
47. also P.S. Appelbaum and T. Grisso, "Assessing Patients Capacities to Consent to Treatment," NEJM 319 (1988): 1635-38 [erratum appears in NEJM 320 (1989):748].
48. J. Katz, "Informed Consent - Must It Remain a Fairy Tale," Journal of Contemporary Health Law Policy 10 (1994): 69-91.
49. D. Hemenway, Quality Assessment. Prices and Choices (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1993).
50. D.M. Berwick, "Continuous Improvement as an Ideal in Health Care," NEJM 320 (1989): 53-56.
51. See ref. 1, Katz, Human Experimentation, and ref. 26,
52. Jonas, "Philosophical Reflections on Human Experimentation";
53. also J. Katz, "The Nuremberg Code and the Nuremberg Trial: A Reappraisal," JAMA 276 (1996): 1662-66.
54. See ref. 2, Ratain et al., "Statistical and Ethical Issues,"
55. and ref. 6, Frei, "Clinical Trials of Antitumor Agents";
56. J. Quigley et al., "Continual Reassessment Method: A Practical Design for Phase 1 Clinical Trials in Cancer," Biometrics 46 (1990): 33-48;
57. B. Eichhorn and S. Zacks, "Sequential Search for an Optimal Dosage," Journal of the American Statistics Association 68 (1973): 594-98;
58. S. Moller, "An Extension of the Continual Reassessment Methods Using a Preliminary Up-and-down Design in a Dose Finding Study in Cancer Patients, in Order to Investigate a Greater Range of Doses," Statistical Medicine 14 (1995): 911-22, at 923;
59. S. Piantadosi and G. Liu, "Improved Designs for Dose Escalation Studies Using Pharmacokinetic Measurements," Statistical Medicine 15 (1996): 1605-18.
60. See ref. 23, Dent and Eisenhauer, "Phase I Trial Design,"
61. and ref. 22, Arbuck, "Workshop on Phase I Study Design."
62. H.H. Hansen et al., "Clinical Studies with 1-(2-Chloroethyl)-3-Cyclohexyl-1-Nitrosourea (NSC 79037)," Cancer Research 31 (1971): 223-27.
63. See. ref. 22, Arbuck, "Workshop on Phase I Study Design."
64. See ref. 6, Frei, "Clinical Trials of Antitumor Agents,"
65. ref. 12, Mick and Ratain, "Model-guided Determination of Maximum Tolerated Dose,"
66. ref. 22, Simon et al., "Accelerated Titration Designs,"
67. and J. O'Quigley and S. Chevret, "Methods for Dose Finding Studies in Cancer Clinical Trials: A Review and Results of a Monte Carlo Study," Statistical Medicine 10 (1991): 1647-64.
68. See ref. 21, Katz, The Silent World of Doctor and Patient.