The ethics of sham surgery in parkinson's disease: Back to the future?

Bioethics

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 175-185

  Swift, Teresa ^a   Huxtable, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Neurosurgery; Parkinson's Disease; Placebo; Research ethics; Sham surgery

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); CONTROL GROUP; ETHICS; HUMAN; MEDICAL ETHICS; METHODOLOGY; PARKINSON DISEASE; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; CONTROL GROUPS; ETHICS COMMITTEES, RESEARCH; ETHICS, CLINICAL; HUMANS; PARKINSON DISEASE; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84876850294     PISSN: 02699702     EISSN: 14678519     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01931.x     Document Type: Article

References (122)

1. T.B. Freeman et al. Use of Placebo Surgery in Controlled Trials of a Cellular-Based Therapy for Parkinson's disease. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 988-991.
2. Stereotactic surgery involves using images from CT or MRI scans to map the brain and provide location co-ordinates which are translated to a stereotactic frame fitted to the patient's head. This is used to guide an electrode (or cannula in the case of neurotransplantation) to the area of the brain to be treated. The stereotactic frame is affixed to the skull with metal pins and the electrode or cannula is inserted into the brain via a burr hole drilled through the skull. Such procedures may be performed under general or local anaesthesia. See R.A.E. Bakay, ed. Movement Disorder Surgery: The Essentials. New York, NY: Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
3. American Medical Association. Code of Medical Ethics. Available at: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-ethics/code-medical-ethics.shtml
4. American Association of Neurological Surgeons and Congress of Neurological Surgeons. Position Statement on Placebo Surgery. Available at: http://www.aans.org/Media/Article.aspx?ArticleId=97932000
5. M.K. Campbell et al. Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Arthroscopic Lavage in the Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee: a Mixed Methods Study of the Feasibility of Conducting a Surgical Placebo-controlled Trial (the KORAL study) Health Technol Assess 2010; 14(5).
6. For example World Medical Association General Assembly. Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/17c.pdf1964
7. National Bioethics Advisory Commission. 2001. Ethical and Policy Issues in Research Involving Human Participants (Summary). Bethesda, MA; General Medical Council. 2002, Good Practice in Research; Medical Research Council. 2000. Good Research Practice. London: Medical Research Council; Royal College of Physicians. Guidelines on the Practice of Ethics Committees in Medical Research. Available at: http://bookshop.rcplondon.ac.uk/contents/pub232-e0da0967-8bed-4ac3-a12f-b05ad6a6c873.pdf2007
8. Council of Europe. 1997. Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. Available at: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/Commun/QueVoulezVous.asp?NT=164&CL=ENG
9. Council of Europe. Additional Protocol to the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, Concerning Biomedical Research. Available at http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/treaties/html/195.htm2005
10. C. Foster. 2001. The Ethics of Medical Research on Humans. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Note there has also been a parallel debate regarding sham knee arthroscopy and other orthopaedic surgery
12. J.B. Moseley et al. Arthroscopic Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee. Am J Sports Med 1996; 24: 28-34
13. J.B. Moseley et al. A Controlled Trial of Arthroscopic Surgery for Osteoarthritis of the Knee. N Engl J Med 347; 2002: 31-88
14. P. Angelos. Sham Surgery in Clinical Trials. JAMA 2007; 297: 1545-1546
15. D.R. Flum. Sham Surgery in Clinical Trials-Reply. JAMA 2007; 297: 1545-1546
16. S. Mehta et al. The Ethics of Sham Surgery in Clinical Orthopaedic Research. J Bone Joint Surg 2007; 89: 1650-1653
17. A.R. Vaccaro & M.G. Fehlings. The Applicability of Clinical Equipoise and Sham Surgery in Patients with Symptomatic Lumbar Radiculopathy due to a Herniated Disc. Spine 2007; 32: 2039-2040.
18. W.R. Brain & R. Bannister. 1992. Brain and Bannister's Clinical Neurology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
19. R. Pahwa & K.E. Lyons. Levodopa-related Wearing-off in Parkinson's Disease: Identification and Management. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2009; 25: 841-849.
20. G. Fénelon & G. Alves. Epidemiology of Psychosis in Parkinson's Disease. Journal of the Neurological Sciences 2010; 289: 12-17.
21. For a full account of treatment options see the Parkinson's Disease section of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders website. Available at: http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/parkinsons_disease/detail_parkinsons_disease.htm
22. C.R. Freed. Transplantation of Embryonic Dopamine Neurons for Severe Parkinson's Disease. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 71-719.
23. C.W. Olanow et al. A Double-blind Controlled Trial of Bilateral Fetal Nigral Transplantation in Parkinson's Disease. Ann Neurol 2003; 54: 403-414.
24. J.G. Nutt et al. Randomized, Double-Blind Trial of Glial Cell Line-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Neurology 2003; 60: 69-73
25. R.L. Watts et al. A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Multicenter Clinical Trial of the Safety and Efficacy of Stereotaxic Intrastriatal Implantation of Fetal Porcine Ventral Mesencephalic Tissue (Neurocelltm-PD) vs Imitation Surgery in Patients with Parkinson Disease (PD). Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2001; 7: S87.
26. C.W. Olanow. Dopaminergic Transplantation for Parkinson's Disease: Current Status and Future Prospects. Ann Neurol 2009; 66: 591-596
27. M. Politis. Serotonergic Neurons Mediate Dyskinesia Side Effects in Parkinson's Patients with Neural Transplants. Sci Translat Med 2010; 2: 38-46
28. Available at: http://www.ceregene.com/press_112608.asp10].
29. A naturally occurring protein which facilitates the functioning of dopamine-secreting neurons.
30. Available at: [Accessed 28 Apr 2010].http://www.ceregene.com/press-042810.asp
31. N.P. Stover & R.L. Watts. Spheramine for Treatment of Parkinson's Disease. Neurother 2008; 5: 252-259
32. Which, as with other Phase 1 trials, had looked promising. No peer-reviewed Phase 2 data has been published at the time of writing.
33. P.D. Cohen et al. 'Failed' Clinical Trials Using Sham Brain Surgery Controls. http://oba.od.nih.gov/oba/RAC/meetings/jun2010/SHAM%20surgery%20comments%20combined.pdf2010 32-39.
34. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/192625.phpM.G. Kaplitt et al. Safety and Tolerability of Gene Therapy with an Adeno-Associated Virus (AAV) Borne GAD Gene for Parkinson's Disease: an Open Label, Phase I Trial. Lancet 2007; 369: 2097-2105.
35. Food and Drug Administration. Code of Federal Regulations Title 21 Section 314.126. Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRsearch.cfm?CFRPart=314
36. R. Tenery et al. Surgical 'Placebo' Controls. Ann Surg 2002; 235: 303-307.
37. R. Adams. Internal-Mammary-Artery Ligation for Coronary Insufficiency. N Engl J Med 1958; 258: 113-116
38. T.L. Cobb et al. An Evaluation of Internal-Mammary-Artery Ligation by a Double-blind Technic. N Engl J Med 1959; 260: 1115-1118
39. J. Thomsen. Placebo Effect in Surgery for Meniere's Disease. Arch Otolaryngol 1981; 107: 271-277.
40. G. Gillett. Unnecessary Holes in the Head. IRB: Ethics and Human Research 2001; 23: 1-6.
41. S. Polgar & J. Ng. Ethics, Methodology and the Use of Placebo Controls in Surgical Trials. Brain Res Bull 2005; 67: 290-297
42. A. Hrjóbartsson & P. Gøtzsche. Is the Placebo Powerless? - An Analysis of Clinical Trials Comparing Placebo with No Treatment. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 1594-1602
43. O. Rascol. Assessing the Risk of a Necessary Harm. Neurology 2005; 65: 982-983.
44. G. Stirrat. Ethics and Evidence Based Surgery. J Med Ethics 2004; 30: 160-165
45. P. Mitchell. Equipoise and Randomisation in Surgery. Br J Neurosurg 2010; 24: 96-97
46. H. Buchwald. Surgical Procedures and Devices Should be Evaluated in the Same Way as Medical Therapy. Control Clin Trials 1997; 18: 478-487
47. R. McLeod et al. Randomized Controlled Trials in Surgery: Issues and Problems. Surgery 1996; 119: 483-486
48. B. Freedman, K. Glass & C. Weijer. Placebo Orthodoxy in Clinical Research I: Empirical and Methodological Myths. J Law Med Ethics 1996; 24: 243-251
49. P. Lavori. Placebo Control Groups in Randomized Treatment Trials: A Statistician's Perspective. Biol Psychiatry 2004; 47: 717-723
50. W. Dekkers & G. Boer. Sham Neurosurgery in Patients with Parkinson's Disease: Is it Morally Acceptable? J Med Ethics 2001; 27: 151-156
51. A. Avins. Can Unequal be More Fair? Ethics, Subject Allocation, and Randomised Clinical Trials. J Med Ethics 1998; 24: 401-408
52. S. Edwards & D. Braunholtz. Can Unequal be More Fair? A Response to Andrew Avins. J Med Ethics 2000; 26: 179-182.
53. D. Machin. 2004. General Issues. In Textbook of Clinical Trials. D. Machin, S. Day & S. Green, eds. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons11-44
54. For Landau, the ethical risks for patients are best limited by longer, more thorough primate model studies. W. Landau. What is the Risk of Sham Surgery in Parkinson Disease Clinical Trials? A Review of Published Reports. Neurology 2005; 66: 1788.
55. N.M.P. King. Defining and Describing Benefit Appropriately in Clinical Trials. J Law Med Ethics 2000; 28: 332-343.
56. J. Fletcher. Sham Neurosurgery in Parkinson's Disease: Ethical at the Time. Am J Bioeth 2003; 3: 54-56.
57. R.E. Ashcroft. Equipoise, Knowledge and Ethics in Clinical Research and Practice. Bioethics 1999; 13: 314-326.
58. R. Macklin. The Ethical Problems with Sham Surgery in Clinical Research. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 992-996
59. K. Lebacqz. Reflections on the Report and Recommendations of the National Commission: Research on the Fetus. Vill L Rev 1977; 22: 357-366
60. R.J. Levine. Clarifying the Concepts of Research Ethics.
61. Hastings Cent Rep 1979; 9: 21-26
62. However, we follow Weijer's distinction between therapeutic procedures which are administered with the intent of providing direct benefit to subjects, and non-therapeutic procedures which are intended only to assist with answering the study question
63. C. Weijer. The Ethical Analysis of Risk. J Law Med Ethics 2000; 28: 344-361.
64. C. Weijer & P.B. Miller. When Are Research Risks Reasonable in Relation to Anticipated Benefits? Nature Med 2004; 10: 570-573
65. United States Department of Health and Human Services. Code of Federal Regulations Title 45 Part 46.102. Available at: http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm#46.102
66. P. Clark. Placebo Surgery for Parkinson's Disease: Do the Benefits Outweigh the Risks? J Law Med Ethics 2002; 30: 58-68.
67. R. Albin. Sham Surgery Controls: Intracerebral Grafting of Fetal Tissue for Parkinson's Disease and Proposed Criteria for Use of Sham Surgery Controls. J Med Ethics 2002; 28: 322-325.
68. S. Horng & F.G. Miller. Is Placebo Surgery Unethical? N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 137-139
69. F.G. Miller & H. Brody. Clinical Equipoise and the Incoherence of Research Ethics. J Med Philos 2007; 32: 151-165
70. F.G. Miller & D.L. Rosenstein. The Therapeutic Orientation to Clinical Trials. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 1383-1386.
71. F.G. Miller. Sham Surgery: An Ethical Analysis. Am J Bioeth 2003; 3: 41-48
72. C. Kowalski. Sham Surgery: Not an Oxymoron Am J Bioeth 2003; 3: W8-W9
73. A.J. London. 2007. Clinical Equipoise: Foundational Requirement or Fundamental Error? In Oxford Handbook of Bioethics. B. Steinbock, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
74. T. Lemmens & P.B. Miller. Avoiding a Jekyll-and-Hyde Approach to the Ethics of Clinical Research and Practice. Am J Bioeth 2002; 2: 14-17
75. D. Steinberg. Clinical Research Should Not Be Permitted to Escape the Ethical Orbit of Clinical Care. Am J Bioeth 2002; 2: 27-28.
76. P.B. Miller & C. Weijer. Equipoise and the Duty of Care in Clinical Research: A Philosophical Response to Our Critics. J Med Philos 2007; 32: 117-133.
77. C. Clark. The Physician's Role, 'Sham Surgery', and Trust: a Conflict of Duties? Am J Bioeth 2003; 3: 57-58
78. C. Weijer. When Argument Fails. Am J Bioeth 2002; 2: 10-11
79. M. Kottow. Clinical and Research Ethics as Moral Strangers. Arch Immunol Ther Exp 2009; 57: 257-164
80. K. Glass & D. Waring. Effective Trial Design Need Not Conflict With Good Patient Care. Am J Bioeth 2002; 2: 25-26
81. D. Sprumont. 1998. Resolving the Inherent Dissonance Between the Doctor's Roles as Healer and Researcher: A Proposal. In Research on Human Subjects: Ethics, Law and Social Policy. D. Weisstub, ed. Oxford: Pergamon; Cf. D. Lenrow. The Treating Physician As Researcher: Is Assuming This Dual Role a Violation of the Nuremberg Code? Temple J Sci Tech Env Law 1996; 25: 15-48
82. P. Angelos. Sham Surgery in Research: A Surgeon's View. Am J Bioeth 2003; 3: 65-66
83. This is the case even if the participant is in the placebo arm, since the placebo is intrinsically active rather than inert.
84. S. Kim. The Sham Surgery Debate and the Moral Complexity of Risk-benefit Analysis. Am J Bioeth 2003; 3: 68-70.
85. T.L. Beauchamp & J.F. Childress. 2009. Principles of Biomedical Ethics, Sixth edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
86. I. Kant. 1785. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. In M. Gregor (translator). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1998
87. M. Parker, R. Huxtable & D. Dickenson. 2010. Cambridge Medical Ethics Workbook, Second edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
88. P.S. Appelbaum, C.H. Roth & C.W. Lidz. The Therapeutic Misconception: Informed Consent in Psychiatric Research. Int J Law Psychiatry 1982; 5: 319-329
89. C.W. Lidz, & P.S. Appelbaum. The Therapeutic Misconception: Problems and Solutions. Med Care 2002; 40(Suppl): 55-63.
90. B. Ravina et al. Long Term Understanding of Study Information in Research Participants with Parkinson's Disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2010; 16:60-63
91. M. Dixon-Woods et al. Beyond 'Misunderstanding': Written Information and Decisions About Taking Part in a Genetic Epidemiology Study. Soc Sci Med 2007; 65: 2212-2222
92. M. Mangset. I Don't Like That, it's Tricking People Too Much. .': Acute Informed Consent to Participation in a Trial of Thrombolysis for Stroke. J Med Ethics 2008; 34: 751-756.
93. T. Grisso. 2001. Method for a Study of the Therapeutic Misconception. Worcester, MA: University of Massachusetts Medical School Center for Mental Health Services Research; D.T. Penman et al. Informed Consent for Investigational Chemotherapy: Patients' and Physicians' Perceptions. J Clin Oncol 1984; 2: 849-855
94. M. Schaeffer et al. The Impact of Disease Severity on the Informed Consent Process in Clinical Research. Am J Med 1996; 100: 261-268.
95. C.W. Lidz et al. Therapeutic Misconception and the Appreciation of Risks in Clinical Trials. Soc Sci Med 2004; 58: 1689-1697
96. S.L. Joffe. Quality of Informed Consent in Cancer Clinical Trials: A Cross-sectional Survey. Lancet 2001; 358: 1772-1777.
97. K. Featherstone & J.L. Donovan. 'Why don't they just tell me straight, why allocate it?' The Struggle to Make Sense of Participating in a Randomised Controlled Trial. Soc Sci Med 2002; 55: 709-719.
98. N.E. Kass et al. Trust: The Fragile Foundation of Contemporary Biomedical Research. Hastings Cent Rep 1996; 26: 25-29
99. While voluntariness in a legal sense is concerned with undue external influence upon a person's decision-making, we subscribe to Olsaretti's definition of voluntariness
100. S. Olsaretti. Freedom, Force and Choice: Against the Rights-based Definition of Voluntariness. J Polit Phil 1998; 6: 53-78
101. Olsaretti argues that an individual's choice among options may be free so long as it is not subject to influence by other people. It may still be a non-voluntary choice, however, if it is made because no other option was acceptable other than the option ultimately chosen.
102. D. Silverman. 1987. Communication and Medical Practice: Social Relations and the Clinic. London: Sage Publications; P. Atkinson. Medical Talk and Medical Work. London: Sage Publications.1995
103. D.B. Resnik. Exploitation and the Ethics of Clinical Trials. Am J Bioeth 2002; 2: 28-29
104. A. Wertheimer. 2001. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/exploitation/
105. S.J.L. Edwards et al. The Ethics of Placebo-controlled Trials: A Comparison of Inert and Active Placebo Controls. World J Surg 2005; 29: 610-614
106. S.J.L. Edwards. Restricted Treatments, Inducements and Research Participation. Bioethics 2006; 20: 77-91.
107. J. Moncrieff, S. Wessely & R. Hardy. Meta-analysis of Trials Comparing Antidepressants with Active Placebos. Br J Psychiatry 1998; 172: 227-231.
108. P. Cohen et al. Ethical Issues in Clinical Neuroscience Research: A Patient's Perspective. Neurother 2007; 4: 537-544
109. See S.J.L. Edwards, S. Kirchin & R. Huxtable. Research Ethics Committees and Paternalism. J Med Ethics 2004; 30: 88-91.
110. E. Garrard & A. Dawson. What is the Role of the Research Ethics Committee? Paternalism, Inducements, and Harm in Research Ethics. J Med Ethics 2005; 31: 419-423.
111. K. Kipnis. Seven Vulnerabilities in the Pediatric Research Subject. Theor Med 2003; 24: 107-120.
112. Online Ethics Center for Engineering. Chapter 4: Assessing Risks and Potential Benefits and Evaluating Vulnerability (Research Involving Human Participants V1). 14 June 2006. National Academy of Engineering. Available at: http://www.onlineethics.org/Topics/RespResearch/ResResources/nbacindex/nbachindex/hchapter4.aspx
113. A.J. London & J.B. Kadane. Sham Surgery and Genuine Standards of Care: Can the Two Be Reconciled? Am J Bioeth 2003; 3: 61-64.
114. E. Emanuel, D. Wendler & C. Grady. What Makes Clinical Research Ethical? JAMA 2000; 283: 2701-2711
115. H.S. Leeds. Social Aspects of Sham Surgeries. Am J Bioeth 2003; 3: 70-71.
116. S.Y.H. Kim et al. Science and Ethics of Sham Surgery: A Survey of Parkinson Disease Clinical Researchers. Arch Neurol 2005; 62: 1357-1360.
117. A majority would therefore presumably disagree with the sham group in the Neurologix trial which included cannula insertion into the brain and injection of saline solution.
118. A.W. Prehn et al. Studying Neurosurgical Implants for Parkinson Disease: A Question of Design. Neurology 2006; 67: 1503-1505.
119. K. Samson. Is Sham Surgery for Parkinson Disease Justifiable? Neurology Today 2005; 5: 5-7.
120. S.A. Frank et al. Ethics of Sham Surgery: Perspective of Patients. Mov Disord 2007; 23: 63-68.
121. E.g. the use of a hypothetical scenario; failure to assess illness severity of participants; response bias, through self-selection of participants, with the participants also not necessarily constituting a sample that is representative of the general public.
122. The first author has conducted qualitative empirical research into UK patients' perspectives on participation in sham surgery in PD as part of a current PhD thesis: The Ethical Implications of Sham Neurosurgery in Patients with Parkinson's Disease.