Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

When Cure Is Not the Goal: Ethical Issues Surrounding Early-Phase Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ethical Issues in Pediatric Hematology/Oncology

Abstract

Pediatric cancer was once a uniformly fatal disease. Sidney Farber, a pioneer of pediatric chemotherapy, was initially criticized for tormenting children by administering experimental chemotherapy when it would have been kinder and gentler to “let them die in peace.” [1] Now, almost 70 years later, the 5-year survival rates in pediatric leukemia are greater than 80% [2]. Clinical studies have served as the engine for these successes. Today, approximately 80% of children with cancer are enrolled in clinical trials. However, the benefits of these studies to society must be balanced against the risks to individual participants, and research subjects must be protected from coercion, exploitation, and any undue harm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mukherjee S. The emperor of all maladies: a biography of cancer. 1st Scribner hardcover ed. New York: Scribner; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Berg SL. Ethical challenges in cancer research in children. Oncologist. 2007;12(11):1336–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. The Nuremberg Code. 1949.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sisk B, Frankel R, Kodish E, Harry Isaacson J. The truth about truth-telling in American medicine: a brief history. Perm J. 2016;20(3):74–7.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ross L. Phase I research and the meaning of direct benefit. J Pediatr. 2006;149(1 Suppl):S20–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Miller VA, Drotar D, Kodish E. Children’s competence for assent and consent: a review of empirical findings. Ethics Behav. 2004;14(3):255–95.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Zinner SE. The elusive goal of informed consent by adolescents. Theor Med. 1995;16(4):323–31.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bartholome WG. A new understanding of consent in pediatric practice: consent, parental permission, and child assent. Pediatr Ann. 1989;18(4):262–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ewald LS. Medical decision making for children: an analysis of competing interests. St Louis Univ Law J. 1982;25(4):689–733.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rickham PP. Human experimentation. Code of ethics of the world medical association. Declaration of Helsinkin. Br Med J. 1964;5(5402):177.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Unguru Y, Coppes MJ, Kamani N. Rethinking pediatric assent: from requirement to ideal. Pediatr Clin N Am. 2008;55(1):211–22.. xii

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nelson RM, Beauchamp T, Miller VA, Reynolds W, Ittenbach RF, Luce MF. The concept of voluntary consent. Am J Bioeth. 2011;11(8):6–16.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sinclair SJ. Involvement of adolescents in decision making for heart transplants. MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2009;34(5):276–81; quiz 282–273.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hickey K. Minors’ rights in medical decision making. JONAS Healthc Law Ethics Regul. 2007;9(3):100–4; quiz 105–106.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bartholome WG. Informed consent, parental permission, and assent in pediatric practice. Pediatrics. 1995;96(5 Pt 1):981–2.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Informed consent, parental permission, and assent in pediatric practice. Committee on Bioethics, American Academy of Pediatrics. Pediatrics. 1995;95(2):314–7.

    Google Scholar 

  17. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Research involving children: report and recommendations. Washington, DC: DHEW; Pblication No. (OS) 77-0044. 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  18. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 45 CFR 46. Subpart D -- additional protections for children involved as subjects in research. Fed Reg. 1983;48:9818.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Levine RJ. Research involving children: an interpretation of the new regulations. IRB. 1983;5(4):1–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Joffe S, Fernandez CV, Pentz RD, et al. Involving children with cancer in decision-making about research participation. J Pediatr. 2006;149(6):862–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hein IM, De Vries MC, Troost PW, Meynen G, Van Goudoever JB, Lindauer RJ. Informed consent instead of assent is appropriate in children from the age of twelve: policy implications of new findings on children’s competence to consent to clinical research. BMC Med Ethics. 2015;16(1):76.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. King NM, Cross AW. Children as decision makers: guidelines for pediatricians. J Pediatr. 1989;115(1):10–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Yap TY, Yamokoski AD, Hizlan S, et al. Informed consent for pediatric phase 1 cancer trials: physicians’ perspectives. Cancer. 2010;116(13):3244–50.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Hazen RA, Zyzanski S, Baker JN, Drotar D, Kodish E. Communication about the risks and benefits of phase I pediatric oncology trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2015;41:139–45.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Meade CD, Howser DM. Consent forms: how to determine and improve their readability. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1992;19(10):1523–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ogloff JR, Otto RK. Are research participants truly informed? Readability of informed consent forms used in research. Ethics Behav. 1991;1(4):239–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Grossman SA, Piantadosi S, Covahey C. Are informed consent forms that describe clinical oncology research protocols readable by most patients and their families? J Clin Oncol. 1994;12(10):2211–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Jubelirer SJ. Level of reading difficulty in educational pamphlets and informed consent documents for cancer patients. W V Med J. 1991;87(12):554–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Goldstein AO, Frasier P, Curtis P, Reid A, Kreher NE. Consent form readability in university-sponsored research. J Fam Pract. 1996;42(6):606–11.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Cox K. Informed consent and decision-making: patients’ experiences of the process of recruitment to phases I and II anti-cancer drug trials. Patient Educ Couns. 2002;46(1):31–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Koyfman SA, Reddy CA, Hizlan S, Leek AC, Kodish AE, Phase IICRT. Informed consent conversations and documents: a quantitative comparison. Cancer. 2016;122(3):464–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Daugherty C, Ratain MJ, Grochowski E, et al. Perceptions of cancer patients and their physicians involved in phase I trials. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13(5):1062–72.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Joffe S, Cook EF, Cleary PD, Clark JW, Weeks JC. Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey. Lancet. 2001;358(9295):1772–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cousino MK, Zyzanski SJ, Yamokoski AD, et al. Communicating and understanding the purpose of pediatric phase I cancer trials. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(35):4367–72.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Johnson LM, Leek AC, Drotar D, et al. Practical communication guidance to improve phase 1 informed consent conversations and decision-making in pediatric oncology. Cancer. 2015;121(14):2439–48.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Schutta KM, Burnett CB. Factors that influence a patient’s decision to participate in a phase I cancer clinical trial. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2000;27(9):1435–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Simon C, Eder M, Kodish E, Siminoff L. Altruistic discourse in the informed consent process for childhood cancer clinical trials. Am J Bioeth. 2006;6(5):40–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Truong TH, Weeks JC, Cook EF, Joffe S. Altruism among participants in cancer clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2011;8(5):616–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Moore S. A need to try everything: patient participation in phase I trials. J Adv Nurs. 2001;33(6):738–47.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Tomamichel M, Jaime H, Degrate A, et al. Proposing phase I studies: patients’, relatives’, nurses’ and specialists’ perceptions. Ann Oncol. 2000;11(3):289–94.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Helft PR, Hlubocky F, Wen M, Daugherty CK. Associations among awareness of prognosis, hopefulness, and coping in patients with advanced cancer participating in phase I clinical trials. Support Care Cancer. 2003;11(10):644–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Agrawal M, Grady C, Fairclough DL, Meropol NJ, Maynard K, Emanuel EJ. Patients’ decision-making process regarding participation in phase I oncology research. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(27):4479–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Barrera M, D’Agostino N, Gammon J, Spencer L, Baruchel S. Health-related quality of life and enrollment in phase 1 trials in children with incurable cancer. Palliat Support Care. 2005;3(3):191–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Deatrick J. Parents’ views of their children’s participation in phase I oncology clinical trials. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs. 2002;19(4):114–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Gordon EJ, Daugherty CK. Referral and decision making among advanced cancer patients participating in Phase I trials at a single institution. J Clin Ethics. 2001;12(1):31–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Rodenhuis S, van den Heuvel WJ, Annyas AA, Koops HS, Sleijfer DT, Mulder NH. Patient motivation and informed consent in a phase I study of an anticancer agent. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol. 1984;20(4):457–62.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Mack JW, Joffe S. Communicating about prognosis: ethical responsibilities of pediatricians and parents. Pediatrics. 2014;133 Suppl 1:S24–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Casarett DJ, Karlawish JH, Henry MI, Hirschman KB. Must patients with advanced cancer choose between a Phase I trial and hospice? Cancer. 2002;95(7):1601–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Appelbaum PS, Roth LH, Lidz CW, Benson P, Winslade W. False hopes and best data: consent to research and the therapeutic misconception. Hast Cent Rep. 1987;17(2):20–4.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Estlin EJ, Cotterill S, Pratt CB, Pearson AD, Bernstein M. Phase I trials in pediatric oncology: perceptions of pediatricians from the United Kingdom Children’s Cancer study group and the pediatric oncology group. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(9):1900–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Horng S, Grady C. Misunderstanding in clinical research: distinguishing therapeutic misconception, therapeutic misestimation, and therapeutic optimism. IRB. 2003;25(1):11–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Kamihara J, Nyborn JA, Olcese ME, Nickerson T, Mack JW. Parental hope for children with advanced cancer. Pediatrics. 2015;135(5):868–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Crites J, Kodish E. Unrealistic optimism and the ethics of phase I cancer research. J Med Ethics. 2013;39(6):403–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Horstmann E, McCabe MS, Grochow L, et al. Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials, 1991 through 2002. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(9):895–904.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Lee DP, Skolnik JM, Adamson PC. Pediatric phase I trials in oncology: an analysis of study conduct efficiency. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(33):8431–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Shah S, Weitman S, Langevin A-M, Bernstein M, Furman W, Pratt C. Phase I therapy trials in children with cancer. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 1998;20(5):431–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Joffe S, Miller FG. Rethinking risk-benefit assessment for phase I cancer trials. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(19):2987–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Critical role of phase I clinical trials in cancer treatment. American Society of Clinical Oncology. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15(2):853–9.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Kodish E. Pediatric ethics and early-phase childhood cancer research: conflicted goals and the prospect of benefit. Account Res. 2003;10(1):17–25.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Le Tourneau C, Lee JJ, Siu LL. Dose escalation methods in phase I cancer clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(10):708–20.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Hartford C, Volchenboum SL, Cohn SL. 3 + 3 not equal to (Rolling) 6. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(2):170–1.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Skolnik JM, Barrett JS, Jayaraman B, Patel D, Adamson PC. Shortening the timeline of pediatric phase I trials: the rolling six design. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(2):190–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Zhao L, Lee J, Mody R, Braun TM. The superiority of the time-to-event continual reassessment method to the rolling six design in pediatric oncology Phase I trials. Clin Trials. 2011;8(4):361–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Onar-Thomas A, Xiong Z. A simulation-based comparison of the traditional method, Rolling-6 design and a frequentist version of the continual reassessment method with special attention to trial duration in pediatric Phase I oncology trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2010;31(3):259–70.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Newick K, Moon E, Albelda SM. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for solid tumors. Mol Ther Oncolytics. 2016;3:16006.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Johansson H, Andersson R, Bauden M, Hammes S, Holdenrieder S, Ansari D. Immune checkpoint therapy for pancreatic cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2016;22(43):9457–76.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Calabrese L, Velcheti V. Checkpoint immunotherapy: good for cancer therapy, bad for rheumatic diseases. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(1):1–3.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Macy ME, Sawczyn KK, Garrington TP, Graham DK, Gore L. Pediatric developmental therapies: interesting new drugs now in early-stage clinical trials. Curr Oncol Rep. 2008;10(6):477–90.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Saletta F, Wadham C, Ziegler DS, et al. Molecular profiling of childhood cancer: biomarkers and novel therapies. BBA Clin. 2014;1:59–77.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Jain RK, Lee JJ, Hong D, et al. Phase I oncology studies: evidence that in the era of targeted therapies patients on lower doses do not fare worse. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16(4):1289–97.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Wong KM, Capasso A, Eckhardt SG. The changing landscape of phase I trials in oncology. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016;13(2):106–17.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Mussai FJ, Yap C, Mitchell C, Kearns P. Challenges of clinical trial design for targeted agents against pediatric leukemias. Front Oncol. 2014;4:374.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA

    Bryan Sisk

  2. Pediatric Hematology Oncology and Blood and Marrow Transplantation, Cleveland Clinic Main Campus, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Eric Kodish

  3. Department of Bioethics and Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Cancer Prevention Control and Population Research Program, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Eric Kodish

Authors
  1. Bryan Sisk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eric Kodish
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bryan Sisk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Texas Children’s Cancer and Hematology Centers, Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Children’s Hospital, Houston, TX, USA

    Kate A. Mazur

  2. Texas Children’s Cancer and Hematology Centers, Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Children’s Hospital, Houston, TX, USA

    Stacey L. Berg

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sisk, B., Kodish, E. (2020). When Cure Is Not the Goal: Ethical Issues Surrounding Early-Phase Research. In: Mazur, K., Berg, S. (eds) Ethical Issues in Pediatric Hematology/Oncology . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22684-8_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22684-8_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-22683-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-22684-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation