Clinical equipoise

Last updated

Clinical equipoise, also known as the principle of equipoise, provides the ethical basis for medical research that involves assigning patients to different treatment arms of a clinical trial. The term was first used by Benjamin Freedman in 1987, although references to its use go back to 1795 by Edward Jenner. [1] [2] In short, clinical equipoise means that there is genuine uncertainty in the expert medical community over whether a treatment will be beneficial. This applies also for off-label treatments performed before or during their required clinical trials.[ citation needed ]

Contents

An ethical dilemma arises in a clinical trial when the investigator(s) begin to believe that the treatment or intervention administered in one arm of the trial is significantly outperforming the other arms. A trial should begin with a null hypothesis, and there should exist no decisive evidence that the intervention or drug being tested will be superior to existing treatments, or that it will be completely ineffective. As the trial progresses, the findings may provide sufficient evidence to convince the investigator of the intervention or drug's efficacy. Once a certain threshold of evidence is passed, there is no longer genuine uncertainty about the most beneficial treatment, so there is an ethical imperative for the investigator to provide the superior intervention to all participants. Ethicists contest the location of this evidentiary threshold, with some suggesting that investigators should only continue the study until they are convinced that one of the treatments is better, and with others arguing that the study should continue until the evidence convinces the entire expert medical community.[ citation needed ]

The extent to which major research ethics policies endorse clinical equipoise varies. For instance, the Canadian Tri-Council Policy Statement [3] endorses it, whereas the International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) does not. With regard to clinical equipoise in practice, there is evidence that industry-funded studies disproportionately favor the industry product, suggesting unfavorable conditions for clinical equipoise.[ citation needed ] In contrast, a series of studies of national cancer institute funded trials suggests an outcome pattern consistent with clinical equipoise. [4]

History

Shaw and Chalmers argued early on that "If the clinician knows, or has good reason to believe, that a new therapy (A) is better than another therapy (B), he cannot participate in a comparative trial of Therapy A versus Therapy B. Ethically, the clinician is obligated to give Therapy A to each new patient with a need for one of these therapies." [5] Researchers would thus face an ethical dilemma if they wanted to continue the study and collect more evidence, but had compelling evidence that one of the tested therapies was superior. They further stated that any results should be withheld from the researchers during the trial until completion to avoid this ethical dilemma and ensure the study’s completion.

This method proved to be difficult in modern research, where many clinical trials have to be performed and analyzed by experts in that field. Freedman proposed a different approach to this ethical dilemma called clinical equipoise. Clinical equipoise occurs "if there is genuine uncertainty within the expert medical community — not necessarily on the part of the individual investigator — about the preferred treatment." [1] Clinical equipoise is distinguished from theoretical equipoise, which requires evidence on behalf of the alternative treatments to be exactly balanced and thus yields a very fragile epistemic threshold for favoring one treatment over the other. Theoretical equipoise could be disturbed, for example, by something as simple as anecdotal evidence or a hunch on the part of the investigator. Clinical equipoise allows investigators to continue a trial until they have enough statistical evidence to convince other experts of the validity of their results, without a loss of ethical integrity on the part of the investigators.

Equipoise is also an important consideration in the design of a trial from a patient’s perspective. This is especially true in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for surgical interventions, where both trial and control arms are likely to have their own associated risks and hopes for benefits. The condition of the patient is also a factor in these risks. Ensuring that trials meet the standards of clinical equipoise is an important part of patient recruitment in this regard; it is likely that past trials that did not meet conditions of clinical equipoise suffered from poor recruitment. [6]

Criticism

Miller and Brody argue that the notion of clinical equipoise is fundamentally misguided. The ethics of therapy and the ethics of research are two distinct enterprises that are governed by different norms. They state, "The doctrine of clinical equipoise is intended to act as a bridge between therapy and research, allegedly making it possible to conduct RCTs without sacrificing the therapeutic obligation of physicians to provide treatment according to a scientifically validated standard of care. This constitutes therapeutic misconception concerning the ethics of clinical trials, analogous to the tendency of patient volunteers to confuse treatment in the context of RCTs with routine medical care." [7] Equipoise, they argue, only makes sense as a normative assumption for clinical trials if one assumes that researchers have therapeutic obligations to their research participants. Further criticisms of clinical equipoise have been leveled by Robert Veatch [8] and by Peter Ubel and Robert Silbergleit. [9]

See also

Related Research Articles

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is "the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients." The aim of EBM is to integrate the experience of the clinician, the values of the patient, and the best available scientific information to guide decision-making about clinical management. The term was originally used to describe an approach to teaching the practice of medicine and improving decisions by individual physicians about individual patients.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Informed consent</span> Need and process for obtaining subject approval prior to treatment or research

Informed consent is a principle in medical ethics, medical law and media studies, that a patient must have sufficient information and understanding before making decisions about their medical care. Pertinent information may include risks and benefits of treatments, alternative treatments, the patient's role in treatment, and their right to refuse treatment. In most systems, healthcare providers have a legal and ethical responsibility to ensure that a patient's consent is informed. This principle applies more broadly than healthcare intervention, for example to conduct research and to disclose a person's medical information.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Randomized controlled trial</span> Form of scientific experiment

A randomized controlled trial is a form of scientific experiment used to control factors not under direct experimental control. Examples of RCTs are clinical trials that compare the effects of drugs, surgical techniques, medical devices, diagnostic procedures or other medical treatments.

Bioethics is both a field of study and professional practice, interested in ethical issues related to health, including those emerging from advances in biology, medicine, and technologies. It proposes the discussion about moral discernment in society and it is often related to medical policy and practice, but also to broader questions as environment, well-being and public health. Bioethics is concerned with the ethical questions that arise in the relationships among life sciences, biotechnology, medicine, politics, law, theology and philosophy. It includes the study of values relating to primary care, other branches of medicine, ethical education in science, animal, and environmental ethics, and public health.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Clinical trial</span> Phase of clinical research in medicine

Clinical trials are prospective biomedical or behavioral research studies on human participants designed to answer specific questions about biomedical or behavioral interventions, including new treatments and known interventions that warrant further study and comparison. Clinical trials generate data on dosage, safety and efficacy. They are conducted only after they have received health authority/ethics committee approval in the country where approval of the therapy is sought. These authorities are responsible for vetting the risk/benefit ratio of the trial—their approval does not mean the therapy is 'safe' or effective, only that the trial may be conducted.

In a blind or blinded experiment, information which may influence the participants of the experiment is withheld until after the experiment is complete. Good blinding can reduce or eliminate experimental biases that arise from a participants' expectations, observer's effect on the participants, observer bias, confirmation bias, and other sources. A blind can be imposed on any participant of an experiment, including subjects, researchers, technicians, data analysts, and evaluators. In some cases, while blinding would be useful, it is impossible or unethical. For example, it is not possible to blind a patient to their treatment in a physical therapy intervention. A good clinical protocol ensures that blinding is as effective as possible within ethical and practical constraints.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human genetic enhancement</span> Technologies to genetically improve human bodies

Human genetic enhancement or human genetic engineering refers to human enhancement by means of a genetic modification. This could be done in order to cure diseases, prevent the possibility of getting a particular disease, to improve athlete performance in sporting events, or to change physical appearance, metabolism, and even improve physical capabilities and mental faculties such as memory and intelligence. These genetic enhancements may or may not be done in such a way that the change is heritable.

Cognitive analytic therapy (CAT) is a form of psychological therapy initially developed in the United Kingdom by Anthony Ryle. This time-limited therapy was developed in the context of the UK's National Health Service with the aim of providing effective and affordable psychological treatment which could be realistically provided in a resource constrained public health system. It is distinctive due to its intensive use of reformulation, its integration of cognitive and analytic practice and its collaborative nature, involving the patient very actively in their treatment.

A serious adverse event (SAE) in human drug trials is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose

  1. Results in death
  2. Is life-threatening
  3. Requires inpatient hospitalization or causes prolongation of existing hospitalization
  4. Results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity
  5. May have caused a congenital anomaly/birth defect
  6. Requires intervention to prevent permanent impairment or damage

The Declaration of Helsinki is a set of ethical principles regarding human experimentation developed originally in 1964 for the medical community by the World Medical Association (WMA). It is widely regarded as the cornerstone document on human research ethics.

A hierarchy of evidence, comprising levels of evidence (LOEs), that is, evidence levels (ELs), is a heuristic used to rank the relative strength of results obtained from experimental research, especially medical research. There is broad agreement on the relative strength of large-scale, epidemiological studies. More than 80 different hierarchies have been proposed for assessing medical evidence. The design of the study and the endpoints measured affect the strength of the evidence. In clinical research, the best evidence for treatment efficacy is mainly from meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Systematic reviews of completed, high-quality randomized controlled trials – such as those published by the Cochrane Collaboration – rank the same as systematic review of completed high-quality observational studies in regard to the study of side effects. Evidence hierarchies are often applied in evidence-based practices and are integral to evidence-based medicine (EBM).

Treatment of ME/CFS is variable and uncertain, and the condition is primarily managed rather than cured.

A glossary of terms used in clinical research.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Placebo-controlled study</span>

Placebo-controlled studies are a way of testing a medical therapy in which, in addition to a group of subjects that receives the treatment to be evaluated, a separate control group receives a sham "placebo" treatment which is specifically designed to have no real effect. Placebos are most commonly used in blinded trials, where subjects do not know whether they are receiving real or placebo treatment. Often, there is also a further "natural history" group that does not receive any treatment at all.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency controversy</span> Medical condition

Chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency is a term invented by Italian researcher Paolo Zamboni in 2008 to describe compromised flow of blood in the veins draining the central nervous system. Zamboni hypothesized that it might play a role in the cause or development of multiple sclerosis (MS). Zamboni also devised a surgical procedure which the media nicknamed a liberation procedure or liberation therapy, involving venoplasty or stenting of certain veins. Zamboni's ideas about CCSVI are very controversial, with significantly more detractors than supporters, and any treatments based on his ideas are considered experimental.

The use of electronic and communication technologies as a therapeutic aid to healthcare practices is commonly referred to as telemedicine or eHealth. The use of such technologies as a supplement to mainstream therapies for mental disorders is an emerging mental health treatment field which, it is argued, could improve the accessibility, effectiveness and affordability of mental health care. Mental health technologies used by professionals as an adjunct to mainstream clinical practices include email, SMS, virtual reality, computer programs, blogs, social networks, the telephone, video conferencing, computer games, instant messaging and podcasts.

Various organizations have created guidelines for human subject research for various kinds of research involving human subjects and for various situations.

A platform trial is a type of prospective, disease-focused, adaptive, randomized clinical trial (RCT) that compares multiple, simultaneous and possibly differently-timed interventions against a single, constant control group. As a disease-focused trial design, platform trials attempt to answer the question "which therapy will best treat this disease". Platform trials are unique in their utilization of both: a common control group and their opportunity to alter the therapies it investigates during its active enrollment phase. Platform trials commonly take advantage of Bayesian statistics, but may incorporate elements of frequentist statistics and/or machine learning.

Many health organizations around the world have denounced and criticized sexual orientation and gender identity change efforts. National health organizations in the United States have announced that there has been no scientific demonstration of conversion therapy's efficacy in the last forty years. They find that conversion therapy is ineffective, risky and can be harmful. Anecdotal claims of cures are counterbalanced by assertions of harm, and the American Psychiatric Association, for example, cautions ethical practitioners under the Hippocratic oath to do no harm and to refrain from attempts at conversion therapy.

Benjamin Djulbegovic is an American distinguished physician-scientist who serves as the director of the Hematology Stewardship Program in the Division of Hematology/Oncology at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston, SC. His academic and research focus revolves around optimizing clinical research and the practice of medicine by comprehending the nature of medical evidence and decision-making. He integrated concepts from evidence-based medicine (EBM), predictive analytics, health outcome research, and decision sciences.

References

  1. 1 2 Freedman, B. (1987). "Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research". The New England Journal of Medicine. 317 (3): 141–145. doi:10.1056/NEJM198707163170304.
  2. ↑ Davies, Hugh (March 2007). "Ethical reflections on Edward Jenner's experimental treatment". Journal of Medical Ethics. 33 (3): 174–176. doi:10.1136/jme.2005.015339. ISSN   0306-6800. PMC   2598263 . PMID   17329392.
  3. ↑ TCPS2. "Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans". Panel of Research Ethics. Archived from the original on 2013-12-03. Retrieved 2018-06-11.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  4. ↑ Djulbegovic, B. (2009). "The Paradox of Equipoise: The Principle That Drives and Limits Therapeutic Discoveries in Clinical Research". Cancer Control. 16 (4): 342–347.
  5. ↑ Shaw, L., A. M. & T. Chalmers (1970). "Ethics in Cooperative Clinical Trials". Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 169, 487–495.
  6. ↑ Lilford, R. et al. (2004). "Trials in surgery". British Journal of Surgery, 91, 6–16.
  7. ↑ Miller, F. G. and H. Brody (2003). "A Critique of Clinical Equipoise: Therapeutic Misconception in the Ethics of Clinical Trials". The Hastings Center Report, 33, (3): 19–28.
  8. ↑ Veatch, R. ‘The Irrelevance of Equipoise’, Journal of Medical Philosophy, (2007), 32, (2): 167–183
  9. ↑ Ubel, P. and Robert Silbergleit (2011). "Behavioral Equipoise: A Way to Resolve Ethical Stalemates in Clinical Research". The American Journal of Bioethics, 11, (2): 1–8.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.