How participants in cancer trials are chosen: Ethics and conflicting interests

Nature Reviews Cancer

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 330-336

  Jayson, Gordon ^a   Harris, John ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ANTINEOPLASTIC ACTIVITY; CANCER; CANCER SURVIVAL; CONFIDENTIALITY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DISEASE FREE INTERVAL; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; DOSE CALCULATION; DRUG METABOLISM; FAMILY; HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; PATIENT SELECTION; PHARMACODYNAMICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RESEARCH ETHICS; RESEARCH SUBJECT; REVIEW;

CLINICAL TRIALS; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; ETHICS, MEDICAL; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; PATIENT SELECTION;

EID: 33645307757     PISSN: 1474175X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrc1842     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Eisenhauer, E. A., O'Dwyer, P. J., Christian, M. & Humphrey, J. S. Phase I clinical trial design in cancer drug development. J. Clin. Oncol. 18, 684 (2000).
2. Horstmann, E. et al. Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials, 1991 through 2002. N. Engl. J. Med. 352, 895-904 (2005).
3. Omura, G. A. Modified Fibonacci search. J. Clin. Oncol. 21, 3177 (2003).
4. Harris, J. & Keywood, K. Ignorance, information and autonomy. Theor. Med. Bioeth. 22, 415-436 (2001).
5. Harris, J. Consent and end of life decisions. J. Med. Ethics 29, 10-16 (2003).
6. Rogatko, A., Babb, J. S., Tighiouart, M., Khuri, F. R. & Hudes, G. New paradigm in dose-finding trials: patient-specific dosing and beyond phase I. Clin. Cancer Res. 11, 5342-5346 (2005).
7. Rosa, D. D., Harris, J. M. & Jayson, G. C. Best guess approach to phase I trial design. J. Clin. Oncol. (in the press).
8. McCabe, A., Dolled-Filhart, M., Camp, R. L. & Rimm, D. L. Automated quantitative analysis (AQUA) of in situ protein expression, antibody concentration, and prognosis. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 97, 1808-1815 (2005).
9. Yingling, J. M. & Glatt, S. Impact of PK/PD evaluation of targeted therapies on early drug discovery and clinical development. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. Educ. Book 2005, 227-230 (2005).
10. Peppercorn, J. M., Weeks, J. C., Cook, E. F. & Joffe, S. Comparison of outcomes in cancer patients treated within and outside clinical trials: conceptual framework and structured review. Lancet 363, 263 (2004).
11. O'Brien, S. G. et al. Imatinib compared with interferon and low-dose cytarabine for newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 348, 994-1004 (2003).
12. Slamon, D. J. et al. Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2. N. Engl. J. Med. 344, 783-792 (2001).
13. Ciaccone, G. & Rodriguez, J. A. EGFR inhibitors: what have we learned from the treatment of lung cancer? Nature Clin. Pract. Oncol. 2, 554-561 (2005).
14. Today, B. M. E. The BMA's Handbook of Ethics and Law (BMJ Publishing Group, 2004).
15. Lachmann, P. Consent and confidentiality - where are the limits? An introduction. J. Med. Ethics 29, 2-4 (2003).
16. O'Neill, O. Some limits of informed consent. J. Med. Ethics 29, 4-8 (2003).
17. Daugherty, C. et al. Perceptions of cancer patients and their physicians involved in phase I trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 13, 1062-1072 (1995).
18. Grossman, S. A., Piantadosi, S. & Covahey, C. Are informed consent forms that describe clinical oncology research protocols readable by most patients and their families? J. Clin. Oncol. 12, 2211-2215 (1994).
19. Weinfurt, K. P. et al. Understanding of an aggregate probability statement by patients who are offered participation in Phase I clinical trials. Cancer 103, 140-147 (2005).
20. Stryker, J. E., Wray, R. J., Emmons, K. M., Winer, E. & Demetri, G. Understanding the decisions of cancer clinical trial participants to enter research studies: factors associated with informed consent, patient satisfaction, and decisional regret. Patient Educ. Couns. (in the press).
21. Coyne, C. A. et al. Randomized, controlled trial of an easy-to-read informed consent statement for clinical trial participation: a study of the eastern cooperative oncology group. J. Clin. Oncol. 21, 836-842 (2003).
22. Joffe, S., Cook, E. F., Cleary, P. D., Clark, J. W. & Weeks, J. C. Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: across-sectional survey. Lancet 358, 1772 (2001).
23. Jones, M. Informed consent and other fairy stories. Med. Law Rev. 7, 103-134 (1999).
24. Angell, M. The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It (Random House, New York, New York, 2004).
25. Topol, E. J. & Blumenthal, D. Physicians and the investment industry. JAMA 293, 2654-2657 (2005).
26. Hurwitz, H. et al. Bevacizumab (a monoclonal antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor) prolongs survival in first-line colorectal cancer (CRC): results of a Phase III trial of bevacizumab in combination with bolus IFL (irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin) as first-line therapy in subjects with metastatic CRC. Amer. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 22, 3646 (2003).
27. Hurwitz, H. et al. Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 350, 2335-2342 (2004).
28. Harris, J. What is the good of health care? Bioethics 10, 269-292 (1996).
29. Harris, J. QALYfying the value of life. J. Med. Ethics 13, 117-123 (1987).
30. Daniels, N. Justice and Justification, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996).
31. Rawlins, M. & Dillon, A. nice discrimination. J. Med. Ethics 31, 683-685 (2005).
32. Harris, J. Nice and not so nice. J. Med. Ethics 31, 683-685 (2005).
33. Paez, J. G. et al. EGFR mutations in lung cancer: correlation with clinical response to gefitinib therapy. Science 304, 1497-500 (2004).
34. European Union Clinical Trials Directive. http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/ pri/en/oj/dat/2001/1_121/l_12120010501en00340044.pdf (2001).
35. Harris, J. Scientific research is a moral duty. J. Med. Ethics 31, 242-248 (2005).