Post-trial access to study medication: a Brazilian e-survey with major stakeholders in clinical research

Objectives To analyse the perspective of clinical research stakeholders concerning post-trial access to study medication. Methods Questionnaires and informed consents were sent through e-mail to 599 ethics committee (EC) members, 290 clinical investigators (HIV/AIDS and Diabetes) and 53 sponsors in Brazil. Investigators were also asked to submit the questionnaire to their research patients. Two reminders were sent to participants. Results The response rate was 21%, 20% and 45% in EC, investigators and sponsors' groups, respectively. 54 patients answered the questionnaire through their doctors. The least informative item in the consent form was how to obtain the study medication after trial. If a benefit were demonstrated in the study, 60% of research participants and 35% of EC answered that all patients should continue receiving study medication after trial; 43% of investigators believed the medication should be given to participants, and 40% to subjects who participated and benefited from treatment. For 50% of the sponsors, study medication should be assured to participants who had benefited from treatment. The majority of responders answered that medication should be provided free by sponsors; investigators and sponsors believed the medication should be kept until available in the public health sector; EC members said that the patient should keep the benefit; patients answered that benefits should be assured for life. Conclusions Due to the study limitations, the results cannot be generalised; however, the data can contribute to discussion of this complex topic through analysing the views of stakeholders in clinical research in Brazil.

Progress in animal experimentation ethics. A case study from a brazilian medical school and from the international medical literature

PURPOSE: This study describes in Brazil and in the global biomedical community the time course of the development of animal research welfare guidelines. METHODS: The database of the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine of Ribeirao Preto (EC/FMRP-USP), Brazil, was surveyed since its inception in 2002 as the regulations became more stringent to provide better protection of animal research welfare at this institution. Medline database was evaluated to identify the number of publications in the period between 1968 and 2008 that used research animals and were in compliance with established ethics guidelines. RESULTS: The EC/FMRP-USP evaluated 979 projects up until 2009. Most of the applications came from Department of Physiology and the most frequently requested species was the rat. In 2004, national research funding agencies started to request prior approval from institutional review ethics committees prior to application review and this requirement became federal law in Brazil in 2008. The analysis of international publications revealed a relative reduction in studies involving research animals (18% in 1968 to 7.5% in 2008). CONCLUSIONS: The present work showed that in the last four decades major changes occurred in the guidelines dictating use of research animals occurred and they are being adopted by developing countries. Moreover, animal welfare concern in the scientific community preceded the introduction of journal guidelines for this purpose. Furthermore, in Brazil it was anticipated that laws were needed to protect animal research welfare from being not upheld.

Progress in animal experimentation ethics: a case study from a Brazilian medical school and from the international medical literature

PURPOSE: This study describes in Brazil and in the global biomedical community the time course of the development of animal research welfare guidelines. METHODS: The database of the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine of Ribeirao Preto (EC/FMRP-USP), Brazil, was surveyed since its inception in 2002 as the regulations became more stringent to provide better protection of animal research welfare at this institution. Medline database was evaluated to identify the number of publications in the period between 1968 and 2008 that used research animals and were in compliance with established ethics guidelines. RESULTS: The EC/FMRP-USP evaluated 979 projects up until 2009. Most of the applications came from Department of Physiology and the most frequently requested species was the rat. In 2004, national research funding agencies started to request prior approval from institutional review ethics committees prior to application review and this requirement became federal law in Brazil in 2008. The analysis of international publications revealed a relative reduction in studies involving research animals (18% in 1968 to 7.5% in 2008). CONCLUSIONS: The present work showed that in the last four decades major changes occurred in the guidelines dictating use of research animals occurred and they are being adopted by developing countries. Moreover, animal welfare concern in the scientific community preceded the introduction of journal guidelines for this purpose. Furthermore, in Brazil it was anticipated that laws were needed to protect animal research welfare from being not upheld.

Bioethics and medical/legal considerations on cochlear implants in children

Cochlear implants are the best treatment for congenital profound deafness. Pediatric candidates to implantation are seen as vulnerable citizens, and the decision of implanting cochlear devices is ultimately in the hands of their parents/guardians. The Brazilian Penal Code dictates that deaf people may enjoy diminished criminal capacity. Many are the bioethical controversies around cochlear implants, as representatives from the deaf community have seen in them a means of decimating their culture and intrinsic values. Objective: This paper aims to discuss, in bioethical terms, the validity of implanting cochlear hearing aids in children by analyzing their vulnerability and the social/cultural implications of the procedure itself, aside from looking into the medical/legal aspects connected to their criminal capacity. Materials and Methods: The topic was searched on databases Medline and Lilacs; ethical analysis was done based on principialist bioethics. Results: Cochlear implants are the best therapeutic option for people with profound deafness and are morally justified. The level of criminal capacity attributed to deaf people requires careful analysis of the subject's degree of understanding and determination when carrying out the acts for which he/she has been charged. Conclusion: Cochlear implants are morally valid. Implantations must be analyzed on an each case basis. ENT physicians bear the ethical responsibility for indicating cochlear implants and must properly inform the child's parents/guardians and get their written consent before performing the procedure.