Clinical trials, informed consent, & emergency medicine: A systematic literature review

Background: In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates clinical trials. These regulations address good clinical practices as well as human subject protection (FDA, 2012). One of the most important legal and ethical concerns in clinical trials is informed consent. 21 CFR 50 governs human subjects research. Part 50.24 provides an emergency research exception to the informed consent requirement. Research was conducted to determine the appropriateness of this exception, whether the benefit justifies the exception, and its public health significance.^ Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted and articles were identified from peer-reviewed journals.^ Results: There is some variance in opinions regarding the appropriateness of the exception, but the literature reviewed found the study results of these trials justified the waiver.^ Conclusion: The exception to the informed consent requirement is likely appropriate and justified in emergency research when implemented within the specified guidelines.^

Comparator clinical trials of surrogate endpoints with albiglutide are in HARMONY

Introduction: Agonists of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptors are used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Albiglutide is a new long acting GLP-1 receptor agonist being developed for once-weekly use. Areas covered: This evaluation is of 2 clinical trials in the HARMONY clinical trials series. HARMONY 3 compares albiglutide to sitagliptin and glimepiride in subjects with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled with metformin, and HARMONY 6 compares albiglutide to insulin lispro in subjects poorly controlled with slow/medium release preparations of insulin. Expert opinion: Both studies showed that albiglutide lowered HbA1c, and had advantages over its comparator drugs. However, questions remain about the safety of albiglutide. Albiglutide is not being used in subjects with a history of thyroid cancer, as it is not known whether this is a rare adverse effect with albiglutide. Also, the safety of albiglutide in subjects with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk is unknown.

Perception of the informed consent form by participants in clinical trials

To understand the perception of the participants in controlled clinical trials (CCTs) about the informed consent and describe the meaning of their participation in the research. Qualitative study using the focus group technique. The sample was composed of 19 patients who participated in clinical trials about hypertension and coronary disease in a specialized cardiologic hospital located in the city of Sao Paulo. The methodological framework used was the content analysis. Some of the participants were aware of the real objective of these studies while others had misperceptions. The reading of the informed consent is not always done and, when it is done, the patient does not understand it. The lack of understanding about the term ''placebo'' was mentioned by some participants. The motivation to participate was the personal benefit. This study shows that obtaining the informed consent in CCTs is complex and that there is the need to adapt the structure and application of this document, in order to protect the participants and improve the quality of clinical trials performed in the country.

Informed consent in clinical research: do patients understand what they have signed?

Informed consent is an essential element of research, and signing this document is required to conduct most clinical trials. Its aim is to inform patients what their participation in the study will involve. However, increasingly, their complexity and length are making them difficult to understand, which might lead patients to give their authorization without having read them previously or without having understood what is stated. In this sense, the Ethics Committees for Clinical Research, and Pharmacists specialized in Hospital Pharmacy and Primary Care in their capacity as members of said committees, play an important and difficult role in defending the rights of patients. These Committees will review thoroughly these documents to guarantee that all legal requirements have been met and, at the same time, that they are easy to understand by the potential participants in a clinical trial.

Improving communication when seeking informed consent: a randomised controlled study of a computer-based method for providing information to prospective clinical trial participants

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy, with respect to participant understanding of information, of a computer-based approach to communication about complex, technical issues that commonly arise when seeking informed consent for clinical research trials. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: An open, randomised controlled study of 60 patients with diabetes mellitus, aged 27-70 years, recruited between August 2006 and October 2007 from the Department of Diabetes and Endocrinology at the Alfred Hospital and Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne. INTERVENTION: Participants were asked to read information about a mock study via a computer-based presentation (n = 30) or a conventional paper-based information statement (n = 30). The computer-based presentation contained visual aids, including diagrams, video, hyperlinks and quiz pages. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Understanding of information as assessed by quantitative and qualitative means. RESULTS: Assessment scores used to measure level of understanding were significantly higher in the group that completed the computer-based task than the group that completed the paper-based task (82% v 73%; P = 0.005). More participants in the group that completed the computer-based task expressed interest in taking part in the mock study (23 v 17 participants; P = 0.01). Most participants from both groups preferred the idea of a computer-based presentation to the paper-based statement (21 in the computer-based task group, 18 in the paper-based task group). CONCLUSIONS: A computer-based method of providing information may help overcome existing deficiencies in communication about clinical research, and may reduce costs and improve efficiency in recruiting participants for clinical trials.

Systematic evaluation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) protocol content and reporting in UK cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study protocol

Introduction Emerging evidence suggests that patient-reported outcome (PRO)-specific information may be omitted in trial protocols and that PRO results are poorly reported, limiting the use of PRO data to inform cancer care. This study aims to evaluate the standards of PRO-specific content in UK cancer trial protocols and their arising publications and to highlight examples of best-practice PRO protocol content and reporting where they occur. The objective of this study is to determine if these early findings are generalisable to UK cancer trials, and if so, how best we can bring about future improvements in clinical trials methodology to enhance the way PROs are assessed, managed and reported. Hypothesis: Trials in which the primary end point is based on a PRO will have more complete PRO protocol and publication components than trials in which PROs are secondary end points.

Methods and analysis Completed National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Portfolio Cancer clinical trials (all cancer specialities/age-groups) will be included if they contain a primary/secondary PRO end point. The NIHR portfolio includes cancer trials, supported by a range of funders, adjudged as high-quality clinical research studies. The sample will be drawn from studies completed between 31 December 2000 and 1 March 2014 (n=1141) to allow sufficient time for completion of the final trial report and publication. Two reviewers will then review the protocols and arising publications of included trials to: (1) determine the completeness of their PRO-specific protocol content; (2) determine the proportion and completeness of PRO reporting in UK Cancer trials and (3) model factors associated with PRO protocol and reporting completeness and with PRO reporting proportion.

Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the ethics committee at University of Birmingham (ERN_15-0311). Trial findings will be disseminated via presentations at local, national and international conferences, peer-reviewed journals and social media including the CPROR twitter account and UOB departmental website (http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/cpro0r).

Single-agent versus combination chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and a performance status of 2 : prognostic factors and treatment selection based on two large randomized clinical trials

Purpose: Data from two randomized phase III trials were analyzed to evaluate prognostic factors and treatment selection in the first-line management of advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with performance status (PS) 2. Patients and Methods: Patients randomized to combination chemotherapy (carboplatin and paclitaxel) in one trial and single-agent therapy (gemcitabine or vinorelbine) in the second were included in these analyses. Both studies had identical eligibility criteria and were conducted simultaneously. Comparison of efficacy and safety was performed between the two cohorts. A regression analysis identified prognostic factors and subgroups of patients that may benefit from combination or single-agent therapy. Results: Two hundred one patients were treated with combination and 190 with single-agent therapy. Objective responses were 37 and 15%, respectively. Median time to progression was 4.6 months in the combination arm and 3.5 months in the single-agent arm (p < 0.001). Median survival imes were 8.0 and 6.6 months, and 1-year survival rates were 31 and 26%, respectively. Albumin <3.5 g, extrathoracic metastases, lactate dehydrogenase ≥200 IU, and 2 comorbid conditions predicted outcome. Patients with 0-2 risk factors had similar outcomes independent of treatment, whereas patients with 3-4 factors had a nonsignificant improvement in median survival with combination chemotherapy. Conclusion: Our results show that PS2 non-small cell lung cancer patients are a heterogeneous group who have significantly different outcomes. Patients treated with first-line combination chemotherapy had a higher response and longer time to progression, whereas overall survival did not appear significantly different. A prognostic model may be helpful in selecting PS 2 patients for either treatment strategy. © 2009 by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

Safety and efficacy of the combination of trastuzumab with docetaxel for HER2-positive women with advanced breast cancer : a review of the existing clinical trials and results of the expanded access programme in the UK

Trastuzumab is a humanised monoclonal antibody against the extracellular domain of HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor-2) that is overexpressed in about 25% of human breast cancers. It has shown clinical benefit in HER2-positive breast cancer cases when used alone or in combination with chemotherapy. Trastuzumab increases the response rate to chemotherapy and prolongs survival when used in combination with taxanes. In this article, we review the clinical trials where trastuzumab has been administered together with docetaxel, and we present the results of the trastuzumab expanded access programme (EAP) in the UK. Combination of trastuzumab with docetaxel results in similar response rates and time-to-progression with the trastuzumab/paclitaxel combinations. The toxicity of the combination and the risk of heart failure are low. The clinical data for the docetaxel/trastuzumab combination indicate a favourable profile from both the efficacy and the safety point of view and confirm the feasibility and safety of trastuzumab administration both as monotherapy and in combination with docetaxel. © 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

A method for matching patients to advanced prostate cancer clinical trials

Objective: To illustrate a new method for simplifying patient recruitment for advanced prostate cancer clinical trials using natural language processing techniques. Background: The identification of eligible participants for clinical trials is a critical factor to increase patient recruitment rates and an important issue for discovery of new treatment interventions. The current practice of identifying eligible participants is highly constrained due to manual processing of disparate sources of unstructured patient data. Informatics-based approaches can simplify the complex task of evaluating patient’s eligibility for clinical trials. We show that an ontology-based approach can address the challenge of matching patients to suitable clinical trials. Methods: The free-text descriptions of clinical trial criteria as well as patient data were analysed. A set of common inclusion and exclusion criteria was identified through consultations with expert clinical trial coordinators. A research prototype was developed using Unstructured Information Management Architecture (UIMA) that identified SNOMED CT concepts in the patient data and clinical trial description. The SNOMED CT concepts model the standard clinical terminology that can be used to represent and evaluate patient’s inclusion/exclusion criteria for the clinical trial. Results: Our experimental research prototype describes a semi-automated method for filtering patient records using common clinical trial criteria. Our method simplified the patient recruitment process. The discussion with clinical trial coordinators showed that the efficiency in patient recruitment process measured in terms of information processing time could be improved by 25%. Conclusion: An UIMA-based approach can resolve complexities in patient recruitment for advanced prostate cancer clinical trials.

Utility of a molecular prescreening program in advanced colorectal cancer for enrollment on biomarker-selected clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Incorporation of multiple enrichment biomarkers into prospective clinical trials is an active area of investigation, but the factors that determine clinical trial enrollment following a molecular prescreening program have not been assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with 5-fluorouracil-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer at the MD Anderson Cancer Center were offered screening in the Assessment of Targeted Therapies Against Colorectal Cancer (ATTACC) program to identify eligibility for companion phase I or II clinical trials with a therapy targeted to an aberration detected in the patient, based on testing by immunohistochemistry, targeted gene sequencing panels, and CpG island methylation phenotype assays. RESULTS: Between August 2010 and December 2013, 484 patients were enrolled, 458 (95%) had a biomarker result, and 157 (32%) were enrolled on a clinical trial (92 on biomarker-selected and 65 on nonbiomarker selected). Of the 458 patients with a biomarker result, enrollment on biomarker-selected clinical trials was ninefold higher for predefined ATTACC-companion clinical trials as opposed to nonpredefined biomarker-selected clinical trials, 17.9% versus 2%, P < 0.001. Factors that correlated positively with trial enrollment in multivariate analysis were higher performance status, older age, lack of standard of care therapy, established patient at MD Anderson, and the presence of an eligible biomarker for an ATTACC-companion study. Early molecular screening did result in a higher rate of patients with remaining standard of care therapy enrolling on ATTACC-companion clinical trials, 45.1%, in contrast to nonpredefined clinical trials, 22.7%; odds ratio 3.1, P = 0.002. CONCLUSIONS: Though early molecular prescreening for predefined clinical trials resulted in an increase rate of trial enrollment of nonrefractory patients, the majority of patients enrolled on clinical trials were refractory to standard of care therapy. Within molecular prescreening programs, tailoring screening for preidentified and open clinical trials, temporally linking screening to treatment and optimizing both patient and physician engagement are efforts likely to improve enrollment on biomarker-selected clinical trials. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: The study NCT number is NCT01196130.

Offshoring Clinical Trials: The Mutable Ethics, Weak Protections and Vulnerable Subjects of EU Law

In this paper I engage with science and technology studies work on pharmaceuticalisation to explore how European Union (EU) law helps to produce and support the preference for pharmaceutical responses in public health governance, while authorising the production of vulnerable subjects through the growing off-shoring of clinical trials. Drawing on the analysis of legal and policy documents, I demonstrate how EU law allows and legitimates the use of data procured from vulnerable subjects abroad for market authorisation and corporate profitability at home. This is possible because the EU has (de)selected international ethical frameworks in order to support the continued and growing use of clinical trials data from abroad. This has helped to stimulate the revision of international ethical frameworks in light of market needs, inscribing EU public health law within specific politics (that often remained obscured by the joint workings of legal and technological discourses). I suggest that law operates as part of a broader ‘technology’ – encompassing ethics and human rights discourses – that functions to optimise life through resort to market reasoning. Law is thereby reoriented, instrumentalised and deployed as part of a broader project aimed at (re)defining and limiting the boundaries of the EU's responsibility for public health, including the broader social production of public health problems and the unequal global order that the EU represents and helps to depoliticise and perpetuate. Overall, this limits the EU's responsibility and accountability for these failures, as well as another: the weak and mutable protections and insecure legacies for vulnerable trial subjects abroad.

Clinical Trials Abroad: The Marketable Ethics, Weak Protections and Vulnerable Subjects of EU Law

This chapter explores how the EU is a largely overlooked exporter of normative power through its facilitation and use of clinical trials data produced abroad for the marketing of safe pharmaceuticals at home; a move that helps to foster the growing resort to pharmaceuticals as a fix for public health problems. This is made possible by the EU’s (de)selection of international ethical frameworks in preference to the international technical standards it co-authors with other global regulators. Clinical trials abroad underscore how ethics are contingent and revisable in light of market needs, producing weak protections for the vulnerable subjects of EU law. I argue that these components and effects of the regime are ultimately about that which undergirds, shapes and directs regulatory design. That is, I point to the use, infiltration, perpetuation and extension of market-oriented ideas, values and rationalities into formally non-market domains like biomedical knowledge production and public health. I explain how these are central to efforts at producing and legitimating the EU, its related imagined socio-political order based on a more innovative, profitable and competitive pharmaceutical sector in order to foster economic growth, jobs and prosperity, and with them the project of European integration. ‘Bioethics as risk’ is highlighted as a way to reshape and redirect the regulatory regime in ways that are more consistent with the spirit and letter of the ethical standards (and through them the human rights) the EU claims to uphold.