Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Science and Society
  • Published:

How participants in cancer trials are chosen: ethics and conflicting interests

Nature Reviews Cancer volume 6, pages 330–336 (2006)Cite this article

Abstract

The development of new drugs for cancer is extremely complex and expensive, and poses ethical problems. In this article we will review issues in clinical trials for cancer drugs that will cast new light on the doctor–patient relationship and their interaction with industry, the health service, academic and administrative organizations. We show that the Declaration of Helsinki cannot be applied to cancer trials as it is currently written, that patients do not and perhaps cannot give fully informed consent to participate, and that the results of clinical trials do not translate into daily practice in a way that patients might expect.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1

References

  1. Eisenhauer, E. A., O'Dwyer, P. J., Christian, M. & Humphrey, J. S. Phase I clinical trial design in cancer drug development. J. Clin. Oncol. 18, 684 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Horstmann, E. et al. Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials, 1991 through 2002. N. Engl. J. Med. 352, 895–904 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Omura, G. A. Modified Fibonacci search. J. Clin. Oncol. 21, 3177 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Harris, J. & Keywood, K. Ignorance, information and autonomy. Theor. Med. Bioeth. 22, 415–436 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Harris, J. Consent and end of life decisions. J. Med. Ethics 29, 10–16 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rogatko, A., Babb, J. S., Tighiouart, M., Khuri, F. R. & Hudes, G. New paradigm in dose-finding trials: patient-specific dosing and beyond phase I. Clin. Cancer Res. 11, 5342–5346 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Rosa, D. D., Harris, J. M. & Jayson, G. C. Best guess approach to phase I trial design. J. Clin. Oncol. (in the press).

  8. McCabe, A., Dolled-Filhart, M., Camp, R. L. & Rimm, D. L. Automated quantitative analysis (AQUA) of in situ protein expression, antibody concentration, and prognosis. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 97, 1808–1815 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Yingling, J. M. & Glatt, S. Impact of PK/PD evaluation of targeted therapies on early drug discovery and clinical development. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. Educ. Book 2005, 227–230 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Peppercorn, J. M., Weeks, J. C., Cook, E. F. & Joffe, S. Comparison of outcomes in cancer patients treated within and outside clinical trials: conceptual framework and structured review. Lancet 363, 263 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. O'Brien, S. G. et al. Imatinib compared with interferon and low-dose cytarabine for newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 348, 994–1004 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Slamon, D. J. et al. Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2. N. Engl. J. Med. 344, 783–792 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Giaccone, G. & Rodriguez, J. A. EGFR inhibitors: what have we learned from the treatment of lung cancer? Nature Clin. Pract. Oncol. 2, 554–561 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Today, B. M. E. The BMA's Handbook of Ethics and Law (BMJ Publishing Group, 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lachmann, P. Consent and confidentiality — where are the limits? An introduction. J. Med. Ethics 29, 2–4 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. O'Neill, O. Some limits of informed consent. J. Med. Ethics 29, 4–8 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Daugherty, C. et al. Perceptions of cancer patients and their physicians involved in phase I trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 13, 1062–1072 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Grossman, S. A., Piantadosi, S. & Covahey, C. Are informed consent forms that describe clinical oncology research protocols readable by most patients and their families? J. Clin. Oncol. 12, 2211–2215 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Weinfurt, K. P. et al. Understanding of an aggregate probability statement by patients who are offered participation in Phase I clinical trials. Cancer 103, 140–147 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Stryker, J. E., Wray, R. J., Emmons, K. M., Winer, E. & Demetri, G. Understanding the decisions of cancer clinical trial participants to enter research studies: factors associated with informed consent, patient satisfaction, and decisional regret. Patient Educ. Couns. (in the press).

  21. Coyne, C. A. et al. Randomized, controlled trial of an easy-to-read informed consent statement for clinical trial participation: a study of the eastern cooperative oncology group. J. Clin. Oncol. 21, 836–842 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Joffe, S., Cook, E. F., Cleary, P. D., Clark, J. W. & Weeks, J. C. Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey. Lancet 358, 1772 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Jones, M. Informed consent and other fairy stories. Med. Law Rev. 7, 103–134 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Angell, M. The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It (Random House, New York, New York, 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Topol, E. J. & Blumenthal, D. Physicians and the investment industry. JAMA 293, 2654–2657 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Hurwitz, H. et al. Bevacizumab (a monoclonal antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor) prolongs survival in first-line colorectal cancer (CRC): results of a Phase III trial of bevacizumab in combination with bolus IFL (irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin) as first-line therapy in subjects with metastatic CRC. Amer. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 22, 3646 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hurwitz, H. et al. Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 350, 2335–2342 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Harris, J. What is the good of health care? Bioethics 10, 269–291 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Harris, J. QALYfying the value of life. J. Med. Ethics 13, 117–123 (1987).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Daniels, N. Justice and Justification, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. Rawlins, M. & Dillon, A. nice discrimination. J. Med. Ethics 31, 683–685 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Harris, J. Nice and not so nice. J. Med. Ethics 31, 683–685 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Paez, J. G. et al. EGFR mutations in lung cancer: correlation with clinical response to gefitinib therapy. Science 304, 1497–500 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. European Union Clinical Trials Directive. http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2001/l_121/l_12120010501en00340044.pdf (2001).

  35. Harris, J. Scientific research is a moral duty. J. Med. Ethics 31, 242–248 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the Cancer Research UK and University of Manchester Department of Medical Oncology, Christie Hospital, Withington, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK

    Gordon Jayson

  2. the Institute of Medicine, Law and Bioethics, School of Law, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PR, UK

    John Harris

Authors
  1. Gordon Jayson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John Harris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gordon Jayson.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Related links

Related links

DATABASES

National Cancer Institute

breast cancer

chronic myeloid leukaemia

colon cancer

lung cancer

FURTHER INFORMATION

NICE bevacizumab & cetuximab appraisal

WMA Declaration of Helsinki Policy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jayson, G., Harris, J. How participants in cancer trials are chosen: ethics and conflicting interests. Nat Rev Cancer 6, 330–336 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc1842

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc1842

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing