660 likes | 807 Views
People. Protecting Human Subjects in Research. David Borasky, CIP Office of International Research Ethics Family Health International. Protecting People in Research: An Overview. Ethical Principles Historical Perspectives Guidelines and Regulations Informed Consent IRBs Current Issues
E N D
People Protecting Human Subjects in Research David Borasky, CIP Office of International Research Ethics Family Health International
Protecting People in Research: An Overview • Ethical Principles • Historical Perspectives • Guidelines and Regulations • Informed Consent • IRBs • Current Issues • Case Studies
Regulatory Definitions Research means a systematic investigation, including research development, testing and evaluation,designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge.
Regulatory Definitions Human subject means a living individual about whom an investigator conducting research obtains: (1) data through intervention or interaction with the individual; or (2) identifiable private information.
Basic Ethical Principles • “The expression ‘basic ethical principles’ refers to those general judgments that serve as a basic justification for the many particular ethical prescriptions and evaluations of human actions. Three basic principles, among those generally accepted in our cultural tradition, are particularly relevant to the ethics of research involving human subjects: the principles of respect of persons, beneficence and justice.” • National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research
Respect for Persons • Two ethical convictions: • individuals should be treated as autonomous agents • persons with diminished autonomy are entitled to protection • Two separate moral requirements: • requirement to acknowledge autonomy • requirement to protect those with diminished autonomy
Beneficence Persons are treated in an ethical manner not only by respecting their decisions and protecting them from harm, but also by making efforts to secure their well-being. • Two general rules: • Do not harm • Maximize possible benefits and minimize possible harms
Justice “Who ought to receive the benefits of research and bear its burdens? This is a question of justice, in the sense of ‘fairness in distribution’ or ‘what is deserved.’ An injustice occurs when some benefit to which a person is entitled is denied without good reason or when some burden is imposed unduly.”
Research Ethics in the 20th Century • How did we arrive at this point? • Human nature being what it is…. • Informs public perception and promotes discussion of issues
Cuba, 1900 Yellow Fever studies conducted by US Army Major Walter Reed • Exposed people to mosquito bites • Successfully determined method of transmission • Coercive stipends offered to people who volunteered in the research
Germany, 1900 City code (Berlin) regulating human research • Protections for vulnerable populations • Informed consent • Description of risks
Germany, 1931 Reich Circular More restrictive than the Berlin Code Animal testing required Additional protections for vulnerable pops. Special training in the conduct of research
Germany, WWII As part of the German war effort, Nazi doctors performed numerous medical experiments on concentration camp prisoners.
Human Radiation Experiments • Driven by the Cold War • Exposed people to radiation through a variety of methods to evaluate the effect of exposure to radiation on humans • Discovery of scandal led to ACHRE
Willowbrook State School,1956-1963 • Studies of Hepatitis A virus on institutionalized children • Deliberate infection • Beds only available to those who signed their children up as research subjects
Obedience to AuthorityYale University, 1960’s • Staged experiments that required deceiving people who volunteered in the study • Participants told to shock students who gave wrong answers • Participants not aware that the “students” were confederates of the study team
“I observed a mature and initially poised businessman enter the lab smiling and confident. Within 20 min he was reduced to a twitching stuttering wreck… rapidly approaching a point of nervous collapse. He pulled on his earlobe, twisted his hands, and at one point pushed his fist into his forehead and muttered: ‘Oh, God, let’s stop it.’” Stanley Milgram, 1963
Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital, 1963 • Elderly debilitated patients injected with live cancer cells to study immunologic response • Patients not informed • investigators did not want to frighten unnecessarily • a priori hypothesis that cells would be rejected
The San Antonio Contraceptive Study • Mostly poor Mexican-American women • Randomized, placebo-controlled, double blinded crossover design clinical trial • No mention of placebo • 10 pregnancies while on placebo
“Untreated Syphilis in the Male Negro”Macon County AL, 1932-1972 • Sponsored by the USPHS (now CDC) • 400 subjects with latent syphilis • 200 controls • No treatment • Burial stipend of $50
Lessons for future long-range studies: “Incentives for maximum cooperation of the patients must be kept in mind. What appears to be a real incentive to an outsider's way of thinking may have little appeal for the patient. In our case, free hot meals meant more to the men than $50 worth of free medical examination.” “The value of rapport and sympathy between patient and physician, and between patient and nurse… never can be overestimated. Material incentives can merely supplement and support a basic feeling of good will. A kind word is often worth a carton full of free medicines. A single home visit is worth more than a dozen letters on impressive stationery.” From “Twenty Years of Followup Experience in a Long-Range Medical Study,” Rivers et al, Public Health Reports, 69:391-5, 1953
The Story Breaks - 1972 Philadelphia Enquirer, 1972
HIV/AIDS Research • 076 – Placebo controlled MTCT trial • If it’s not ethical in Philadelphia why is it ethical in Uganda? • Is local standard of care enough in research setting? • Angell / Lurie say no
Gene Therapy Trials • Jesse Gelsinger • Problems with informed consent • Conflict of interest • Who is liable when things go wrong?
Johns Hopkins University • Ellen Roche dies in challenge study using hexamethonium • Employees as participants in research • New standards for IRB review?
Is History Doomed to Repeat Itself? Previous transgressions in the conduct of research have led to the development of guidelines, regulations and codes. Some of these documents were created in response a specific incident. Others symbolize a desire to better. All require that people in research be treated ethically.
The Nuremberg Code • Voluntary consent / ability to stop • Build on previous knowledge • Avoid unnecessary risks • Benefit to society • Qualified investigators • Justification of risks
The Declaration of Helsinki • Consent in writing • Independently reviewed • Protocol must be followed • Caution if investigators are treating their patients • Best proven diagnostic and therapeutic methods*
The Belmont Report • Established the National Commission • Response to Tuskegee • Identified three basic ethical principles • Respect for Persons • Beneficence • Justice
US Regulations • Reflect principles of Belmont • 45 CFR 46 (1981) • Special protections for pregnant women, prisoners, and children • The Common Rule (1991) • FDA Regulations
Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences • Response to rise of international research • Benefits for all participants • PI has duties in informed consent process • Participant has right to compensation for injury
International Conference on Harmonization • Result of a collaboration of public and private organizations in the US, Europe, and Japan • limited acceptance in developing world • Designed to standardize the drug development and approval process • Sets standards for protocol development • Includes sponsor responsibilities
National Bioethics Advisory Commission • Issued report on international research in 2001 • responsibilities of sponsor • benefits for host countries • use of placebo must be justified • consent issues (alternatives to US standard) • Commission now dissolved
Helsinki (2000) “The benefits, risks, burdens and effectiveness of a new method should be tested against those of the best current prophylactic, diagnostic, and therapeutic methods. This does not exclude the use of placebo, or no treatment, in studies where no proven prophylactic, diagnostic or therapeutic method exists.” Paragraph 29 WMA Declaration of Helsinki October 2000 revision
Clarification “We say almost explicitly … that if there is treatment, then you cannot give a sugar pill to the control group.” Delon Human, Secretary General, World Medical Association October 7, 2000
Clarification (reprise) “A placebo-controlled trial may be ethically acceptable, even if proven therapy is available, under the following circumstances: • Where for compelling and scientifically sound methodological reasons its use is necessary to determine the efficacy or safety of a…method; or • Where a…method is being investigated for a minor condition and the patients who receive placebo will not be subject to any additional risk of serious or irreversible harm.” World Medical Association Council
Informed Consent • What is informed consent? • document • process • legal protection • for whom?
Early consent form used by Maj.Walter Reed for Yellow Fever Studies (26 Nov. 1900)
An informed consent document is… • a form through which people are offered the opportunity to participate in research • a tangible symbol that can be of great importance to people who volunteer • a legal document that protects institutions • as important or unimportant as the research staff makes it