Advertisement
Journal of Clinical Oncology  
Search for:
Limit by:
  Browse by Subject or Issue
Home Search or Browse JCO My JCO Subscriptions Customer Service Site Map

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Save to my personal folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRights & Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kodish, E.
Right arrow Articles by Siegler, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kodish, E.
Right arrow Articles by Siegler, M.

Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 10, 1810-1816, Copyright © 1992 by American Society of Clinical Oncology


ARTICLES

Ethical issues in phase I oncology research: a comparison of investigators and institutional review board chairpersons

E Kodish, C Stocking, MJ Ratain, A Kohrman and M Siegler
Department of Pediatrics, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, IL.

PURPOSE: Phase I research trials assess the safety of agents never before administered to humans. In the field of oncology, this practice raises several important ethical questions. We examined the ethics of these trials by surveying phase I oncology investigators and institutional review board (IRB) chairpersons at major cancer research centers around the country. METHODS: Questionnaires were mailed to 78 investigators and 47 chairpersons to obtain their views on the ethical propriety of conducting phase I oncology research, and on institutional practice regarding these trials. The response rate was 68% in each group. RESULTS: The majority of each group reported that phase I oncology trials face no more scrutiny or resistance in their institution's IRB process than other research protocols. Nevertheless, IRB chairpersons were more likely than investigators to favor special procedural safeguards to protect subjects in phase I oncology trials. Nearly all respondents agreed that although actual medical benefit was very uncommon, most patients entered for a chance at a therapeutic effect. Investigators were more likely than chairpersons to report that patients obtained psychologic benefit from participation in phase I trials. CONCLUSION: Although individual IRB chairpersons and oncology investigators may have important differences of opinion concerning the ethics of phase I trials, these disagreements do not represent a widespread area of ethical conflict in clinical research.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
B. Lee, A. Lim, A. Lalvani, M. J. L. Descamps, R. Leonard, S. Nallamala, J. S. Lewis, R. C. Coombes, and J. Stebbing
The clinical significance of radiologically detected silent pulmonary nodules in early breast cancer
Ann. Onc., December 1, 2008; 19(12): 2001 - 2006.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
A. Italiano, C. Massard, R. Bahleda, A.-L. Vataire, E. Deutsch, N. Magne, J.-P. Pignon, G. Vassal, J.-P. Armand, and J.-C. Soria
Treatment outcome and survival in participants of phase I oncology trials carried out from 2003 to 2006 at Institut Gustave Roussy
Ann. Onc., April 1, 2008; 19(4): 787 - 792.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
M. Agulnik, A. M. Oza, G. R. Pond, and L. L. Siu
Impact and Perceptions of Mandatory Tumor Biopsies for Correlative Studies in Clinical Trials of Novel Anticancer Agents
J. Clin. Oncol., October 20, 2006; 24(30): 4801 - 4807.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
M. Agrawal, C. Grady, D. L. Fairclough, N. J. Meropol, K. Maynard, and E. J. Emanuel
Patients' Decision-Making Process Regarding Participation in Phase I Oncology Research
J. Clin. Oncol., September 20, 2006; 24(27): 4479 - 4484.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Arch Intern MedHome page
M. Markman
"Therapeutic intent" in phase 1 oncology trials: a justifiable objective.
Arch Intern Med, July 24, 2006; 166(14): 1446 - 1448.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Med. EthicsHome page
J Kimmelman and N Palmour
Therapeutic optimism in the consent forms of phase 1 gene transfer trials: an empirical analysis
J. Med. Ethics, April 1, 2005; 31(4): 209 - 214.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
E. Horstmann, M. S. McCabe, L. Grochow, S. Yamamoto, L. Rubinstein, T. Budd, D. Shoemaker, E. J. Emanuel, and C. Grady
Risks and Benefits of Phase 1 Oncology Trials, 1991 through 2002
N. Engl. J. Med., March 3, 2005; 352(9): 895 - 904.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JAMAHome page
T. G. Roberts Jr, B. H. Goulart, L. Squitieri, S. C. Stallings, E. F. Halpern, B. A. Chabner, G. S. Gazelle, S. N. Finkelstein, and J. W. Clark
Trends in the Risks and Benefits to Patients With Cancer Participating in Phase 1 Clinical Trials
JAMA, November 3, 2004; 292(17): 2130 - 2140.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Pediatric Oncology NursingHome page
A. Chang
Nurses' Perceptions of Phase I Clinical Trials in Pediatric Oncology: A Review of the Literature
Journal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing, November 1, 2004; 21(6): 343 - 349.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
JAMAHome page
M. Agrawal and E. J. Emanuel
Ethics of Phase 1 Oncology Studies: Reexamining the Arguments and Data
JAMA, August 27, 2003; 290(8): 1075 - 1082.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
I. Byock and S. H. Miles
Hospice Benefits and Phase I Cancer Trials
Ann Intern Med, February 18, 2003; 138(4): 335 - 337.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
S. Horng, E. J. Emanuel, B. Wilfond, J. Rackoff, K. Martz, and C. Grady
Descriptions of Benefits and Risks in Consent Forms for Phase 1 Oncology Trials
N. Engl. J. Med., December 26, 2002; 347(26): 2134 - 2140.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
H. E. M. van Luijn, A. W. Musschenga, R. B. Keus, W. M. Robinson, and N. K. Aaronson
Assessment of the risk/benefit ratio of phase II cancer clinical trials by Institutional Review Board (IRB) members
Ann. Onc., August 1, 2002; 13(8): 1307 - 1313.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Pediatric Oncology NursingHome page
J. A. Deatrick, D. B. Angst, and C. Moore
Parents' Views of their Children's Participation in Phase I Oncology Clinical Trials
Journal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing, July 1, 2002; 19(4): 114 - 121.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
The OncologistHome page
K. C. Lintz, R. T. Penson, B. A. Chabner, S. Mack, and T. J. Lynch Jr.
A Staff Dialogue on Phase I Trials: Psychosocial Issues Faced by Patients, Their Families, and Caregivers
Oncologist, June 1, 2002; 7(90002): 8 - 15.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
S. Joffe, E. F. Cook, P. D. Cleary, J. W. Clark, and J. C. Weeks
Quality of Informed Consent: a New Measure of Understanding Among Research Subjects
J Natl Cancer Inst, January 17, 2001; 93(2): 139 - 147.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BMJHome page
S. J L Edwards, R J Lilford, and J Hewison
The ethics of randomised controlled trials from the perspectives of patients, the public, and healthcare professionals
BMJ, October 31, 1998; 317(7167): 1209 - 1212.
[Full Text]


Home page
The OncologistHome page
K. C. Lintz, R. T. Penson, B. A. Chabner, S. Mack, and T. J. Lynch
A Staff Dialogue on Phase I Trials: Psychosocial Issues Faced by Patients, Their Families, and Caregivers
Oncologist, October 1, 1998; 3(5): 357 - 364.
[Abstract] [Full Text]



About
JCO
 Editorial
Roster
 Advertising
Information
 Librarians &
Institutions
 Rights &
Permissions
 PDA Services

Copyright © 1992 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
Terms and Conditions of Use
  HighWire Press HighWire Press™ assists in the publication of JCO Online