PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Jeremy Sugarman

Publications and source records attributed to Jeremy Sugarman.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Informed consent in a clinical trial of a novel treatment for rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the informed consent process for a clinical trial of intravenous doxycycline for rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Participants completed a self-administered questionnaire about the consent process at baseline and 16 weeks following enrollment in a clinical trial. RESULTS: Respondents (n = 30) affirmed voluntary participation in the parent trial. Participants acknowledged hope and altruism as reasons for entering the trial more than expectation of personal benefit or outside influences. Many respondents did not understand randomization (14/30), placebos (15/30), or risks of study medications; 11/30 respondents believed that the study drug was completely safe. CONCLUSION: Respondents generally understood the experimental nature of the trial and confirmed their participation was voluntary. However, gaps existed in participants understanding of trial design, raising the question of whether they were adequately informed about the research study prior to enrollment. Further education of potential participants in clinical trials may be required to achieve valid informed consent.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Toward protecting the safety of participants in clinical trials.

It is a widely held belief that the current system of oversight of clinical research, particularly the means of assessing risks and minimizing harms to participants in clinical trials, could be improved. In particular, the system is inefficient with overemphasis on the monitoring ability of some groups such as research ethics review boards and investigators, underemphasis on others such as data monitoring committees (DMCs) and sponsors, confusion about responsibilities for safety and imperfect communication between these different groups. Research ethics review boards are not able to perform safety monitoring by review of individual adverse events and are often burdened by duplicative reviews of large multicenter studies. There are no standards for DMCs to ensure they can reliably identify safety issues. Sponsors may be overreliant on data audits and slow to disseminate safety data in a coherent summary. Investigators, their staffs and clinical sites may not fully appreciate all the nuances of good clinical practice or may be inattentive to the daily conduct of studies. Regulators, particularly those in the United States, have failed to completely harmonize their policies with each other or with international regulatory agencies. We recommend well-designed monitoring plans for all studies that are appropriate to their scope and risk, more centralized review of large multisite studies and closer local scrutiny of single-institution studies. In addition, sponsors should pay greater attention to monitoring adverse events and keeping up-to-date databases or investigator's brochures emphasizing safety issues. A minimal standard of education or expertise in good clinical practice should be established for investigators, their staffs and research ethics review board members. DMC composition and functions should be standardized and regulations should be harmonized nationally and internationally. Finally, there should be a concerted effort to study the efficacy of various components of the system.

Clinical Trials Data Monitoring Committees↗
PubMed2003

Disclosure of cancer diagnosis and prognosis in Northern Tanzania.

Whether to tell patients with cancer about their diagnoses and prognoses is a matter of great debate. While many argue the importance of giving this information to facilitate informed decision-making, others argue that this same information can extinguish hope. Although there is some evidence that disclosure of this information is now commonplace in many Northern and Western settings, there are very few data about this issue from resource-poor nations describing physicians' decision-making regarding whether to disclose this information. Using a combination of ethnographic and other qualitative methods including participant observation, semi-structured interviews, informal interviews, and a review of key documents in Northern Tanzania, we map some of the salient issues in this setting. Like their colleagues in many other parts of the world, Tanzanian physicians often withhold diagnostic and prognostic information from patients. In addition, however, to the cultural arguments often used to justify this practice, issues of treatment availability and patient poverty also influenced the physicians' disclosure practices. Expatriate and Tanzanian physicians practicing in Northern Tanzania often had different approaches to informing patients of their diagnoses and prognoses. Some Tanzanian physicians advocated the use of a "roundabout" approach to disclosure, arguing that it was more reflective of the normal mode of discourse in Tanzania than the more direct approach advocated by many of their expatriate colleagues. Expatriate physicians and some of their Tanzanian colleagues felt that such an indirect approach often left patients confused, or indeed, uninformed.

Cost of Illness↗
PubMed2003

Protecting research subjects under the waiver of informed consent for emergency research: experiences with efforts to inform the community.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Department of Health and Human Services created a method for obtaining a waiver of informed consent to permit research in emergency settings when patients are not competent. One of the requirements to obtain a waiver is public disclosure about the research. We describe approaches used to meet the public disclosure requirement. METHODS: We performed a qualitative content analysis of the FDA's repository for mandatory documentation of public disclosure efforts as of November 1999. Data from 4 studies were analyzed: 2 multi-institutional trials involving trauma and 2 smaller trials involving cardiac arrest. These efforts included both 1-way communications, such as announcements, and 2-way communications, such as focus groups and public meetings. Participation in and common concerns expressed during 2-way communications were noted, as was evidence of mechanisms of advance refusal and the collection of quantitative data on public opinion. RESULTS: One-way communications were the predominant method of disclosure. Many 2-way communications were not directed toward lay persons. Those that were often involved fewer than 15 participants. Concerns regarding inability to refuse study participation, racial biases affecting study design and execution, and ambiguity with regard to how community input would be used in study decision making were raised in several 2-way communications. A minority of participating hospitals announced mechanisms of advance refusal or collected quantitative data on public opinion concerning proposed research. CONCLUSION: Initial experience with obtaining a waiver of informed consent for emergency research suggests that community involvement and specific public concerns should be carefully considered in future applications for such a waiver.

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation↗
PubMed2003

Ethical hurdles for translational research.

The notion of translational research has gained considerable currency over the past few years. While such an approach promises great scientific and clinical advances, the penumbra of translational research tends to incorporate prioritizing scientific projects based upon their potential for translation; tight financial connections between sponsors, scientists and clinical investigators; and sometimes research involving biological approaches for which there is little experience determining safety. It is these aspects of translational research that raise some serious ethical challenges. In this report, we examine three specific areas that raise ethical questions: (1) the potential implications of prioritizing research objectives based on the potential for translation; (2) cautions related to moving from bench to bedside (and back again); and (3) unique questions for translational research initiatives in academic medical centers. Based on this examination, it is clear that the financial and ethical costs as well as benefits of taking a translational approach need to be considered. In the meantime, exquisite attention needs to be paid whenever translational research is likely to affect the traditional fiduciary responsibilities of scientists, clinicians and institutions to research subjects, patients and students. Successful mechanisms that might be developed to address any untoward effects should be shared and evaluated.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2002

A national survey of provisions in clinical-trial agreements between medical schools and industry sponsors.

BACKGROUND: Concerned about threats to the integrity of clinical trials in a research environment increasingly controlled by private interests, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) has issued revised guidelines for investigators' participation in the study design, access to data, and control over publication. It is unclear whether research conducted at academic institutions adheres to these new standards. METHODS: From November 2001 through January 2002, we interviewed officials at U.S. medical schools about provisions in their institutions' agreements with industry sponsors of multicenter clinical trials. A subgroup of the respondents were also asked about coordinating-center agreements for such trials. RESULTS: Of the 122 medical schools that are members of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 108 participated in the survey. The median number of site-level agreements executed per institution in the previous year was 103 (interquartile range, 50 to 210). Scores for compliance with a wide range of provisions--from ensuring that authors of reports on multicenter trials have access to all trial data (1 percent [interquartile range, 0 to 21]) to addressing the plan for data collection and monitoring (10 percent [interquartile range, 1 to 50])--demonstrated limited adherence to the standards embodied in the new ICMJE guidelines. Scores for coordinating-center agreements were somewhat higher for most survey items. CONCLUSIONS: Academic institutions routinely engage in industry-sponsored research that fails to adhere to ICMJE guidelines regarding trial design, access to data, and publication rights. Our findings suggest that a reevaluation of the process of contracting for clinical research is urgently needed.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2002

Study of the media's potential influence on prospective research participants' understanding of and motivations for participation in a high-profile phase I trial.

PURPOSE: To describe prospective participants' initial source of information about, understanding of, and motivation to participate in a phase I clinical trial of the antiangiogenesis agent human recombinant endostatin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We surveyed 100 of 130 persons referred to the endostatin trial between October 1999 and November 2000 and analyzed media coverage of the agent from 1997 to 2000. RESULTS: Forty-seven percent of survey respondents first heard about the trial from media reports. Fifty-one percent of these subsequently contacted their physicians. Thirty-three percent of respondents correctly understood the purpose of the trial. Seventy-nine respondents were interviewed before they met trial investigators to discuss the trial. Of these, those who first heard about endostatin from the media were five times more likely to understand correctly the trial's purpose than those who first heard from other sources. Seventy-four percent (70 of 95) of respondents cited hope for personal benefit as the main reason for their willingness to enroll. Those who first heard about endostatin from the media were no more motivated by hope of personal benefit (77%) than those who first heard from other sources (71%) (P =.46). Ninety-nine percent of all respondents cited "joining the study gives me hope" as a contributing factor in their decision making about the trial. CONCLUSION: Media coverage prompted prospective participants to contact their physicians but did not seem to hinder understanding nor could it be shown to heighten their hope for personal benefit.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Principles, organization, and operation of a DNA bank for clinical trials: a Department of Veterans Affairs cooperative study.

The mapping and sequencing of the human genome promises rapid growth in understanding the genetically influenced mechanisms that underlie human disease. To realize this promise fully, it is necessary to relate genetic information to clinical phenotypes. Genetic tissue banking in clinical studies provides opportunities to analyze the genetic contribution to variation in response to treatments. The challenges to progress are likely to come from the complex organizational, social, political, and ethical issues that must be resolved in order to put clinical and DNA bank information together. Concerns about subjects' rights, informed consent, privacy, and ownership of genetic material require attention in the development of DNA banks. In this paper we describe one approach to the solution of these problems that was adopted by one clinical trials group, the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2002

Optimization of informed consent for umbilical cord blood banking.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this project was to evaluate the informed consent process for donation to a public umbilical cord blood bank. STUDY DESIGN: Telephone interviews were conducted with 170 women who had given consent to donate their newborn infants' umbilical cord blood. RESULTS: Of the 170 women who were contacted, 96.8% of the women reported that all their questions had been answered. Nevertheless, approximately one third of the respondents did not consider themselves to be in research, and almost one quarter of the respondents did not know how to contact the umbilical cord blood bank if they or their infant became seriously ill. Further, a substantial proportion of the respondents did not understand the full range of alternatives to donation and incorrectly endorsed potential benefits. CONCLUSION: Informed consent could be optimized by (1) having those personnel who obtain consent emphasize that banking involves research and to explain the true benefits of donation, (2) ensuring that parents know how and when to contact the umbilical cord blood bank after donation, and (3) using phone surveys to continue assessments and to monitor changes in the process.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Pre-counseling education materials for BRCA testing: does tailoring make a difference?

Although tailored print materials (TPMs) have been assessed for a variety of behavioral targets, their effectiveness as decision aids for genetic testing had not been evaluated at the time this study began. We compared TPMs and non-tailored print material (NPMs) that included similar content about genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility. TPMs were prepared especially for an individual based on information from and about her. We mailed baseline surveys to 461 women referred by physicians or identified through a tumor registry. All had personal and family histories of breast and/or ovarian cancer and, on the basis of these histories, an estimated > or =10% probability of carrying a mutation in the breast/ovarian cancer genes BRCA1 or BRCA2. The 325 (70%) who responded were randomly assigned to receive TPM or NPM. Followup surveys, mailed 2 weeks following receipt of print materials, were returned by 262 women (81% of baseline responders). Participants were predominately white (94%) and well-educated (50% college graduates). The mean age was 49 years. At follow-up, TPM recipients exhibited significantly greater improvement in percent of correct responses for the 13-item true/false measure of knowledge (24% increase for TPM vs. 16% for NPM; p < 0.0001) and significantly less over-estimation of risk of being a mutation carrier (40% TPM group overestimated vs. 70% NPM; p < 0.0001). Anxiety did not differ significantly between groups. Reactions to materials differed on two items: "seemed to be prepared just for me" (76% TPM vs. 52% NPM; p < 0.001) and "told me what I wanted to know about BRCA1 and 2 testing" (98% TPM vs. 91% NPM; p < 0.05). TPMs showed an advantage in increasing knowledge and enhancing accuracy of perceived risk. Both are critical components of informed decision making.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Permission and assent for clinical research in pediatric anesthesia.

IMPLICATIONS: This article discusses the process and specific nature of informed consent for clinical research in pediatric anesthesia. For informed consent to be meaningful, permission from the child's proxy must be obtained and the child's assent must be tailored in a manner that is sensitive to the abilities of children.

Anesthesia↗
PubMed1996

Are research subjects adequately protected? A review and discussion of studies conducted by the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments.

In light of information uncovered about human radiation experiments conducted during the Cold War, an important charge for the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments was to assess the current state of protections for human research subjects. This assessment was designed to enhance the Committee's ability to make informed recommendations for the improvement of future policies and practices for the protection of research subjects. The Committee's examination of current protections revealed great improvement over those from the past, yet some problems remain. Although the data collected by the Committee highlight specific areas in need of attention, the Committee's work should be viewed in part as the beginning of a series of ongoing assessments of the adequacy and effectiveness of the protections afforded to human subjects.

Advisory Committees↗