Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Managing the “Known Unknowns”: Theranostic Cancer Nanomedicine and Informed Consent

  • Protocol
  • First Online:
Book cover Biomedical Nanotechnology

Part of the book series: Methods in Molecular Biology ((MIMB,volume 726))

Abstract

The potential clinical applications and the economic benefits of theranostics represent a tremendous incentive to push research and development forward. However, we should also carefully examine the possible downsides. In this chapter, we address the issue of how theranostics might challenge our current concept of informed consent, especially the disclosure of information concerning diagnosis and treatment options to human subjects. We argue that our lack of data concerning long-term effects and risks of nanoparticles on human health and the environment could undermine the process when it comes to weighing the risks against the benefits. Our lack of an agreed upon framework for risk management in nanomedicine may require us to adopt an “upstream” approach that emphasizes communication and transparency among all relevant stakeholders to help them make informed choices that enable safety or progress.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Protocol
USD 49.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
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

References

  1. Abel, J. “Nanomedicine and Cancer” Available online: http://www.chem.usu.edu/∼tapaskar/Joe-Seminar-Nano-Medicine.pdf.

  2. European Science Foundation Nanomedicine Report (2005) Available online: http://www.esf.org/publication/214/Nanomedicine.pdf.

  3. Sumer, B. and Gao, J. (2008) Theranostic nanomedicine for cancer. Nanomedicine 3, 137-140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Muthu, M. and Singh, S. (2009) Targeted nanomedicine: effective treatment modalities for cancer, AIDS and brain disorders. Nanomedicine 4, 105–118.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Tassinari, O., Caiazzo R. J., Ehrlich J. R., and Liu, B.C-S. (2008) Identifying autoantigens as theranostic targets: antigen arrays and immunoproteonics approaches. Curr. Opin. Mol. Ther. 10, 107–115.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Del Vecchio, S., Zannetti, A., Fonti, R., Pace, L., and Salvatore, M. (2007) Nuclear imaging in cancer theranostics. Q. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imag. 51, 152–163.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ramachandran, G. (June 26, 2009) Theranostics: an evolving field catering to the unmet needs of the medical world. http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/market-insight-print.pag?docid=170968864. Accessed 28 October 2009.

  8. Visogain. (May 29, 2009) In vitro diagnostics: market analysis 2009-2024. http://www.prlog.org/10246394-in-vitro-diagnostics-market-analysis-20092024.pdf. Accessed 28 October 2009.

  9. Blair, E. D. (2008) Assessing the value-adding impact of diagnostic-type tests on drug development and marketing. Mol. Diag. Ther. 12, 331–337.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Jotterand, F. (2007) Nanomedicine: how it could reshape clinical practice. Nanomedicine 2, 401–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. rd Horizon Scanning Workshop (2007) Theranostics – Ethical, legal and social aspects. Muenster, 6th-8th June 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Girod, J. and Klien, A. R. (2009) Predictive health technologies: personalized medicine and toxic exposures. Hous. J. Health L. Policy 9, 163–178.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wilson, R. F. (2006) Symposium article: Nanotechnology: the challenge of regulating known unknowns. J. Law Med. Ethics 34, 704–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rakhlin, M. (2008) Regulating nanotechnology: a private-public insurance solution. Duke Law Tech. Rev. 2008, 2–45.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Resnick, B. R. and Tinkle, S. S. (2007) Ethical issues in clinical trials involving nanomedicine. Contemp. Clin. Trials. 28, 433–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bawa, R. and Johnson, S. (2007) The ethical Dimensions of nanomedicine. Med. Clin. N. Ann. 91, 881–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wolinski, H. (2006) Nanoregulation. EMBO Rep. 7, 858–861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Katz, J. (2009) Informed consent – Must it remain a fairy tale? in: Ethical Issues in Modern Medicine (7 th edition) (Steinbock, B. Arras, J. D., and London, A. J., eds.) McGraw Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Furrow, B. R., Greaney, T. L., Johnson, S. H., Jost, T. S., and Schwartz, R. L. (2000) Health Law (2 nd edition). Hornbook series, West Group, West Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Grim, D. A. (2007) Informed consent for all! No exceptions. New Mexico L. Rev. 37, 39–83.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Etchells, E. (1999) Informed consent in surgical trials. World J. Surg. 23, 1215–1220.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Jotterand, F., McClintock, S. M., Alexander, A. A., and Husain, M. M. (2010) Ethics and informed consent of Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) for patients with Treatment-Resistant Depression (TRD). NeuroEthics 3, 13–22.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Beauchamp, T. L. and Childress, J. F. (2009). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (6th edition). Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Brock, D. (1987). Informed consent. in: Health Care Ethics (Van De Veer, D. and Regan T., eds.) Temple University Press, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Virdi, J. (2008) Bridging the knowledge gap: examining potential limits in nanomedicine. Spon. Gen. 2, 25–44.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Breggin, L., Falkner, R., Jaspers, N., Pendergrass, J., and Porter, R. (2009) Securing the promise of nanotechnologies. Chatham House, London, England: Regulating Nanotechnologies in the EU and US. http://www.lse.ac.uk/internationalRelations/centresandunits/regulatingnanotechnologies/nanopdfs/REPORT.pdf. Assessed 29 October 2009.

  27. Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) (2009) Risk Assessment of Products of Nanotechnologies. http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees04_scenihr_o_023.pdf. Accessed 28 October 2009.

  28. Nanotechnology: a report of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Rockville, Maryland: Nanotechnology Task Force (2007). http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/Nanotechnology/ucm110856.pdf. Accessed 10 October 2009.

  29. Pelley, J. and Saner, M. (2009) International approaches to the regulatory governance of nanotechnology. Ottawa, Ontario: Regulatory Governance Initiative. http://www.carleton.ca/regulation/publications/Nanotechnology_Regulation_Paper_April2009.pdf. Assessed 20 September 2009.

  30. Greenpeace: policy and position paper on Nanotechnology (2002) http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/denmark/press/apporter-or-dokumenter/nanotechnology-policy-positi.pdf. Accessed on 1 October 2009.

  31. Tyshenko, M. G. and Krewski, D. (2008) A risk management framework for the regulation of nanomaterials. Int. J. Nanotechnol. 5, 143–160.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Renn, O. and Roco, M.C. (2006) Nanotechnology and the need for risk governance. J. Nanopart. Res. 8, 153–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Jardine, C. G., Hrudey, S. E., Shortreed, J. H., Craig, L., Krewski, D., Furgal, C., et al. (2003) Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health, Part B 6, 570–718.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Maynard, A. D. (2006) Nanotechnology: assessing the risks. Nanotoday 1, 22–32.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Patra, D., Ejnavarzala, H. and Basu, P. K. (2009) Nanoscience and nanotechnology: ethical, legal, social and environmental issues. Curr. Sci. 96, 651–657.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Orberdorster, G., Oberdorster, E., and Oberdorster, J. (2005) Nanotechnology: an emerging discipline evolving from studies of ultrafine particles. Environ. Health Perspect. 113, 623–839.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Azou, B. L., Jorly, J., On, D., Sellier, E., Moisan, F., Fleury-Feith, J., et al. (2008) In vitro effects of nanoparticles on renal cells. Part. Fibre Tox. 5, 22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Song, Y., Li, X. and Du, X. (2009) Exposure to nanoparticles is related to pleural effusion, pulmonary fibrosis and granuloma. Eur. Respir. J. 34, 559–567.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Marchant, G. E., Sylvester, D. J., and Abbott, K. W. (2008) Risk management principles for nanotechnology. Nanoethics 2, 43–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Linkov, I., Steevens, J., Adlakha-Hutcheon, G., Bennett, E., Chappell, M., Colvin, V., et al. (2009) Emerging methods and tools for environment risk assessment, decision-making, and policy for nanomaterials: summary of NATO Advance Research Workshop. J. Nanopart. Res. 11, 513–527.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Linkov, I., Satterstrom, F. K., Steevens, J., Ferguson, E., and Pleus, R. C. (2007) Multi-criteria analysis environmental risk assessment for nanomaterials. J. Nanopart. Res. 9, 543–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Farber, D. and Lakhtakia, A. (2009) Scenario planning and nanotechnologies futures. Eur. J. Phys. 30, S3-S15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kuzma, J., Paradise, J., Ramachandran, G., Kim, J.-A., Kokotovich, A., and Wolk, S. M. (2008) An integrated approach to oversight assessment for emerging technologies. Risk Anal. 28, 1197–1219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Nano Risk Framework, Washington D.C. and Wilmington, Delaware: Environmental Defense – DuPont Nano Partnership (2007) http://www.edf.org/documents/6496_Nano%20Risk%20Framework.pdf. Accessed on 20 October 2009.

  45. Bowman, D. M. and Hodge, G. A., (2007) A small matter of regulation: an international review of nanotechnology regulation. Columbia Sci. Tech. L. Rev. 8, 1–36.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Bowman, D. M. and Hodge, G. A. (2006) Nanotechnology: mapping the wild regulatory frontier. Futures 38, 1060–1073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Vines, T. and Faunce, T. (2009) Assessing the safety and cost-effectiveness of early nanodrugs. J. Law Med. 16, 822–45.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Till, M. C., Simkin, M. M. and Maebius, S. (2005) Nanotech meets the FDA: a success story about the nanoparticle drugs approved by the FDA. Nanotechnology Law & Bus. 2.2, 163–167.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Faunce, T. A. (2008) Toxicological and public good considerations for the regulation of nanomaterial-containing medical products. Expert Opin. Drug Saf. 7, 103–106.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. U.S. National Institutes of Health, Nanoparticle Studies. [Clinical Trials.gov] http://www.clinicaltrails.gov/ct2/results?term=nano. Accessed on Nov. 10, 2009.

  51. Beasley, J. C., Kramer, V. L., and Priest, S. H. (2008) Expert opinion on nanotechnology: risks, benefits, and regulation. J. Nanopart. Res. 10, 549-558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Weijer, C. and Miller, P. B. (2004) When are research risks reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits? Nat. Med. 10, 570–573.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Wendler, D. and Miller, F. G. (2004) Assessing research risks systematically: the net risks test. J. Med. Ethics 33, 481-486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Avom, J. (2006) Dangerous deception – hiding the evidence of adverse drug effects. NEJM 355, 2170–2171.

    Google Scholar 

  55. King, S. K. and Moulton, B. W. (2006) Rethinking informed consent: the case for shared medical decision making. Am. J. Law Med. 32, 429–493.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Plows, A. and Reinsborough, M. (2008) Nanobiotechnology and Ethics: Converging Civil Society Discourses. in: Emerging Conceptual, Ethical and Policy Issues in Bionanotechnology (Jotterand, F., ed.) Dordrecht, Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Ethics and Health Policy, Department of Clinical Sciences and Psychiatry, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA

    Fabrice Jotterand

Authors
  1. Fabrice Jotterand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Archie A. Alexander
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fabrice Jotterand .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Nanoscale Materials, Argonne National Laboratory, S. Cass Avenue 9700, Argonne, 60439, Illinois, USA

    Sarah J. Hurst

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this protocol

Cite this protocol

Jotterand, F., Alexander, A.A. (2011). Managing the “Known Unknowns”: Theranostic Cancer Nanomedicine and Informed Consent. In: Hurst, S. (eds) Biomedical Nanotechnology. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 726. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-61779-052-2_26

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-61779-052-2_26

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-61779-051-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-61779-052-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Protocols

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation