Clinical Trials of Drugs Used Off-Label in Neonates: Ethical Issues and Alternative Study Designs

The use of drugs for indications unapproved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), often called “off-label use,” is widespread in children, including neonates. The widespread off-label use of drugs in neonates presents ethical and safety challenges. Since the passage of the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA) in 2002, both the FDA and National Institutes of Health (NIH) have taken initiatives to facilitate and encourage research to achieve the necessary labeling for drugs routinely used in infants and children. Federal regulations provide broad rules and guidance for the protection of human subjects in research. However, there are ethical issues that a physician may face when designing clinical trials of drugs in neonates that are routinely used off-label and widely believed to be beneficial. We attempt to describe these ethical challenges and provide recommendations, including alternative study designs, to resolve them in an ethical framework that takes into account the Belmont Report, the statement of the World Medical Association (WMA), and federal regulations.     

Testing drugs in pediatric populations: The FDA mandate

On November 27, 1998 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a new rule requiring that drugs and biological products be tested in pediatric populations. Since voluntary testing in pediatric populations had not resulted in a significant increase in pediatric labeling of drugs, stronger measures were needed to ensure that infants and children would receive the benefits of properly tested drugs and biologies. The mandate for pediatric testing raises a core ethical question: How should the need for validated treatments that benefit children as a group be weighed against the obligation to protect individual child subjects of research? The preamble to the new rule claims that adherence to Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) guidelines will provide adequate protection to individual subjects. Yet the special protections provided to children in these guidelines are not required by the new FDA rule, and have never been obligatory for research that is regulated by the FDA. While the new rule does not necessitate or encourage violation of these standards, the rule does not pay adequate attention to them nor clarify what role they should play in IRB review of protocols under FDA regulation.     

Central ethical dilemmas in research involving children

We are obligated to protect individual child subjects of research, yet it is also necessary to investigate the safety and efficacy of medical treatments that benefit children as a class. The federal regulations on research with children have provided ethical guidance since 1983, but divergent interpretations persist. Since varying interpretations can lead to confusion and abuses, efforts are underway to clarify the criteria. Clarity is needed to protect individual child subjects from harm while enabling ethical research to proceed. The "pediatric rule" and the "pediatric exclusivity" incentive are important policy initiatives for promoting sound research on the medical treatment of children.     

Central Ethical Dilemmas in Research Involving Children

We are obligated to protect individual child subjects of research, yet it is also necessary to investigate the safety and efficacy of medical treatments that benefit children as a class. The federal regulations on research with children have provided ethical guidance since 1983, but divergent interpretations persist. Since varying interpretations can lead to confusion and abuses, efforts are underway to clarify the criteria. Clarity is needed to protect individual child subjects from harm while enabling ethical research to proceed. The "pediatric rule" and the "pediatric exclusivity" incentive are important policy initiatives for promoting sound research on the medical treatment of children.     

Informed Consent and Investigational New Drug Abuses in the U.S. Military

Objective: The focal point of this investigation was to research the ethical issues surrounding the military's requests for informed consent waivers when using investigational drugs, and the recent debate surrounding the anthrax vaccine as an investigational new drug (IND). Design: The military's management of the informed consent process was examined using documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, Institutional Review Board (IRB) minutes, consent forms, legal pleadings, and protocols for specific investigational drugs. Results: In December 1990, prior to Operation Desert Storm, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) granted the Department of Defense (DoD) an unprecedented waiver to the federally mandated informed-consent requirement for the use of investigational drugs. However, the waiver approval was conditional, and the FDA insisted on several safeguards. Partially in response to the subsequent Gulf War Syndrome debate, the FDA recently evaluated the military's use of investigational drugs during the Gulf War. The FDA cited the military for significant deviations from the originally approved protocols. Most notably, the military was found to be abusing the IRB process by convening a second IRB when the first IRB concluded that waiving informed consent was unethical. In addition, there was a gross lack of documentation and no monitoring of adverse reactions. The DoD's plan to use the current anthrax vaccine on all 2.4 million troops against inhalation anthrax has kindled an additional investigational drug controversy. The safety and efficacy of the use of the anthrax vaccine as a prophylactic against inhalation anthrax have been questioned by both military and medical organizations. There have never been any published studies of human efficacy or long-term effects for the anthrax vaccine. In addition, the military is not using the vaccine for its intended purpose, and it is also not adhering to prescribed dosing schedules. There is clear evidence to support the claim that, in fact, the military's use of the anthrax vaccine should be considered experimental. Conclusions: I argue that in medical situations, the military is obligated to treat its troops as autonomous persons entitled to basic rights and protections. The DoD is currently using an approved drug, the anthrax vaccine, for an unapproved purpose and in an unapproved manner. In doing so, the DoD is not only violating the FDA's regulations against such practices, it is also violating an executive order which only allows the president to authorize the use of INDs on service members without their consent.     

Ethical and Regulatory Challenges in Psychophysiology and Neuroscience-Based Technology for Determining Behavior

In the past three decades, there has been an explosion in research to understand the mechanisms of brain function. Recent advances in psychophysiology and neuroscience, while still limited, have sparked great interest in developing technologies that could peer into the brain and be used to identify or indicate certain behaviors. The polygraph (lie detector) represents an old technology used for discerning clues to the human brain; functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) represents one of the newest efforts. The use of these technologies in intelligence and counterintelligence in the field without validation represents a major concern about its usefulness. Both research on this new technology and subsequent use on public raise ethical challenges. This article will address the overall ethical issues associated with these new technologies. The report identifies the ethical and cultural challenges in conducting research on these new tools, explores the possibility of using current U.S. regulatory requirements regarding drugs and devices as a model for regulating these new technologies, and suggests approaches for the future.     

Accessing a hard to reach population: reflections on research with young carers in Ireland

In keeping with developments in children's rights, research is increasingly including the views of children. Accessing a hard to reach population of children can, however, raise significant ethical and methodological challenges for researchers. Negotiating access through gatekeepers, securing parental consent and limits on confidentiality are central issues in the recruitment process of children. This paper is based on a qualitative study of young carers in the Irish population. It outlines the methodological approaches employed to access a representative sample of young carers and the measures taken to fulfil ethical obligations. In the recruitment phase of the study, researchers attempted to strike a balance between two sometimes competing requirements, the need to protect children from harm and to respect children's competence. This paper reflects on the success and limitations of the approaches adopted towards achieving this balance, exploring the use of gatekeepers as a method to identify and recruit a hidden population, and revisiting the measures taken to comply with the ethical requirements of parental consent and limits on confidentiality.     

Children as guinea pigs: historical perspective

Experimentation involving children is not a new phenomenon. Children have been used as research subjects in a diverse set of experiments, including the trials of new vaccines and sera, in efforts to understand normal pediatric anatomy and physiology and in the development of new drugs and procedures. Concern about child participants in research is also not a new development. For more than a century, critics of medical research have called attention to the fact that children and other vulnerable populations--pregnant women, prisoners, the mentally ill--have too often served as the unwitting and unwilling subjects of medical experiments. This paper looks at several early cases in which children participated, including the first trial of cowpox vaccine, the first human trial of rabies vaccine, and the first treatment of Listerian wound antisepsis. The history of concern for children, especially institutionalized children, in medical research is considered along with the development of regulations or guidelines, including the Declaration of Helsinki (1964).     

EPA's 2006 human-subjects rule for pesticide experiments

Arguing that the 2006 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) human-subjects rule allows use of unethical third-party research (on pregnant women and children) in setting pesticide regulations, this article first (a) provides a brief history of U.S. pesticide regulation, particularly regarding childhood safety. Next it (b) outlines ethical and scientific loopholes in the 2006 EPA rule; (c) shows how the Human Subjects Review Board, mandated by the 2006 rule, has been implemented in flawed ways; and (d) illustrates that one source of problems with the rule may be influence by those with conflicts of interest.     

Spinning a Stem Cell Ethics Web

The goal of this study was to provide an ethics education resource for trainees and researchers in the Canadian Stem Cell Network that would address the multiple ethical challenges in stem cell research including accountability in and for research across its multiple dimensions. The website was built using a bottom-up type approach based on an ethics needs assessment in combination with a top-down expert-driven component. There have been 3,615 visitors to the website since it was launched in July, 2011. The ongoing rate of returning visitors (20%) indicates that the website is becoming a valuable tool used multiple times.     

EPA's 2006 Human-Subjects Rule for Pesticide Experiments

Arguing that the 2006 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) human-subjects rule allows use of unethical third-party research (on pregnant women and children) in setting pesticide regulations, this article first (a) provides a brief history of U.S. pesticide regulation, particularly regarding childhood safety. Next it (b) outlines ethical and scientific loopholes in the 2006 EPA rule; (c) shows how the Human Subjects Review Board, mandated by the 2006 rule, has been implemented in flawed ways; and (d) illustrates that one source of problems with the rule may be influence by those with conflicts of interest.     

Ethical guidelines for research with children: A review of current research ethics documentation in New Zealand

Abstract

Children's rights to participate in matters affecting them, including research, have gained increasing recognition over recent decades. This recognition, and the growth in research with children as participants, has given rise to greater attention from researchers to ethical issues related to child research. This article reviews the current ethics documentation in New Zealand. The findings indicate that considerable variation exists between ethical codes and guidelines in relation to research with children. The dominant focus is on attending to issues of consent and protection from harm, at the outset of the research, rather than recognition of the ongoing nature of ethical issues throughout the research process. Although the findings indicate an increase in the consideration of ethical issues, the existing documentation is inconsistent and inadequate in attending to specific child‐related issues. Suggestions are made to enhance children's participation in research and demonstrate a respect for their participation rights.     

Monitoring the Monitors: Medicaid Integration of Passive Remote Monitoring Technology

Implementation of passive remote monitoring is advancing faster than our knowledge base about appropriate and ethical use. For all the media and research attention these technologies are getting, there has been very little discussion about how they are positioned to be integrated into health plans, yet their integration is key to how they will be incorporated into social work practice. As coverage of passive remote monitoring technologies expands in Medicaid home and community-based services (HCBS), new policies that support informed decision-making, consenting processes, and regulations for ethical, appropriate use are urgently needed. Research translation often trails policy, but the rapid development and implementation of technologies that passively collect and transmit new information about older adults call for a more responsive approach. In this commentary, I describe passive remote monitoring technologies, their implementation in Medicaid HCBS, and ethical issues. I conclude with specific suggestions for policy and practice to start addressing these issues.     

Current issues in clinical research and the development of new pharmaceuticals

As a normal part of the drug development process, U.S. pharmaceutical companies conduct many thousands of clinical trials each year. Only after a reasonable assurance of safety is made can the drug be given to patients who have the underlying medical condition that the drug is designed to treat. Patient welfare is assured by adhering to the Food and Drug Administration's interpretation of the "common rule" if the data will be used to support a licensing application. 21 CFR Part 50 sets forth the regulations along with the principles of informed consent and the use of institutional review boards (IRBs) that assure patients' rights are protected. Any potential conflict of interest on the part of a clinical investigator must be reported to the FDA. Pharmaceutical companies extensively monitor ongoing clinical trials for compliance with appropriate regulations. The recent revision of the Declaration of Helsinki governing placebo-controlled clinical trials may adversely impact drug development.     

Research Subjects with Limited English Proficiency: Ethical and Legal Issues

In this article, we examine Institutional Review Board (IRB) policies, international guidelines, and federal regulations and guidance for dealing with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) research subjects. We show that federal and international guidance concerning this topic is insufficient, and there is considerable variation in IRB policies. While some IRBs have thorough and useful policies, others do not. Many IRBs do not provide researchers and IRB members with answers to several important questions relating to language barriers in research. We recommend that federal agencies, international organizations, IRBs, and researchers take steps to fill in the gaps in guidance and policy to help insure that LEP populations will receive equitable and ethical treatment in research.     

Research subjects with limited English proficiency: ethical and legal issues

In this article, we examine Institutional Review Board (IRB) policies, international guidelines, and federal regulations and guidance for dealing with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) research subjects. We show that federal and international guidance concerning this topic is insufficient, and there is considerable variation in IRB policies. While some IRBs have thorough and useful policies, others do not. Many IRBs do not provide researchers and IRB member with answers to several important questions relating to language barriers in research. We recommend that federal agencies, international organizations, IRBs, and researchers take steps to fill in the gaps in guidance and policy to help insure that LEP populations will receive equitable and ethical treatment in research.     

Opportunities and Challenges for Studying Disaster Survivors

Studying survivors of natural disasters and traumatic events provides a unique opportunity to address some of the important and difficult questions in psychology and other social sciences. However, such an opportunity does not come without challenges. Several methodological challenges to studying survivors of natural disasters are discussed, including recruiting participants, choosing appropriate procedures, and the safety of data collectors. Several ethical issues are also presented, such as the ability of participants to make decisions, the impact of participating, and the importance of informed consent. In addition, approaches are suggested that help to deal with these methodological and ethical challenges. We conclude that while attention must be focused on methodological and ethical considerations, research stemming from natural disasters should be employed to answer important basic and applied conceptual questions and address issues of practice and policy, while assuring that steps have been taken to protect participants and that the potential risks are minimal.     

Recent changes in FDA's good laboratory practice regulations

In the Federal Register of December 22, 1978, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published regulations which described Good Laboratory Practice for safety tests conducted on regulated products (Anonymous, 1978). The regulations, popularly known as GLPs, have become universally recognized as the basic criteria for the conduct of a valid safety test and for assuring the quality and integrity of the collected data. Along with the publication of the GLPs, FDA instituted a vigorous program of inspection of toxicology laboratories to determine the degree of adherence to the regulations. In 1984, based on inspectional findings which revealed that a large majority of toxicology laboratories were adhering to the GLPs, FDA published a proposal intended to reduce the burden of compliance with the regulations (Anonymous, 1984). The proposal outlined major changes in the provisions on quality assurance, protocol preparation, test and control article characterization, and retention of specimens and samples. The final order based on the proposal was published in the federal register of September 4, 1987 (Anonymous). The purpose of this communication is to describe the procedures used by FDA to develop the final order, to discuss certain major issues that arose during its development, and to answer several questions that have arisen subsequently.     

Clinical trials integrity: a CRO perspective

When contract research organizations (CROs) were first formed, pharmaceutical companies outsourced to them only certain aspects of the conduct of their clinical trials. At first CROs were highly specialized entities, providing, for example, either biostatistical advice, clinical research associates who monitored investigational sites for regulatory compliance, or regulatory support. Gradually, full service CROs emerged, offering a full range of services for clinical trials, including the selection of investigators and investigational sites, assistance with patient recruitment, safety surveillance and reporting, site audits, and data management and biostatistics. This evolving relationship between CROs and the pharmaceutical and medical device industries has resulted in CROs assuming more and more of the regulatory and ethical risks and responsibilities inherent in the conduct of clinical trials. In this full service role, CROs, unlike sponsors, are not interested in the outcome of study, but like sponsors, are subject to heavy regulation by the federal government, must follow applicable state laws, must respect international guidelines, and are obliged to follow their own operating procedures. Moreover, they are judged by the industry on the basis of the scope and quality of services provided, including the degree of adherence to the research protocol, regulatory requirements, and timelines; the quality of the professional working relationships with investigators and institutions, both academic and community-based; and the validity of the data. Further, CROs are subject to comprehensive audits by sponsoring companies, FDA, and other regulatory authorities. For all these reasons, CROs are being tasked with strict vigilance of all stages of the clinical trial process to ensure that the laws, regulations, and industry standards designed for the protection of human subjects and data integrity are maintained.