Research Ethics and the Ethics of Research: Should We Offer Clinical Trial Participation or Clinical Research Partnership to Oncology Patients in the New Millennium?

  • Heather Sampson
Part of the Cancer Treatment and Research book series (CTAR, volume 140)


Oncology Patient Research Ethic Board Radio Frequency Ablation Oncology Care Therapeutic Misconception 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Radio Frequency Ablation is delivered by inserting a closed umbrella-like instrument under fluoroscopy that is opened once placed to deliver radiofrequency energy to the tumor mass heating the tissue to a temperature that will result in cell necrosis.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lara PN, Jr, Higdon R, Lim N et al. Prospective evaluation of cancer clinical trial accrual patterns: identifying potential barriers to enrollment, J Clin Oncol, 2001; 19(6) (March):1728–1733.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Comis RL, Aldige CR, Stovall EL. et al. A Quantitative Survey of Public Attitudes Towards Cancer Clinical Trials, 2000, Coalition of National Cancer Cooperative Groups.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Foster C. The Ethics of Medical Research on Humans, Cambridge University Press, 2001.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Institutional Review Boards/Research Ethics Boards are the US/Canadian based committees charged with reviewing all clinical trials before being offered to patients.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zlotnik SR. Reviewing the reviewers: the vague accountability of research ethics committees, Critical Care 2002; 6:121–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Amdur, Robert J, Bankert, Elizabeth A. Institutional Review Board: Management and Function, Jones & Bartlett, 2002.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Angelos, P, Murphy, T, Sampson, H et al. Informed consent, capitation, and conflicts of interest in clinical trials: Views form the field, Surgery 2006;140(5):740–748.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eckenwiler L. Moral reasoning and the review of research involving human subjects, Kennedy Inst Ethics J 2001; 11(1):37–69, Johns Hopkins University Press.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eckstein, S. (ed.), Manual for Research Ethics Committees, Cambridge University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    11.Glannon, W. Phase I oncology trials: why the therapeutic misconception will not go away, J Med Ethics 2006;32:252–255; doi:10.1136/jme.2005.015685.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Agrawal M, Grady C, Fairclough D, et al. Patients’ decision-making process regarding participation in phase I oncology research, J Clin Oncol Sept 20, 2006; 24 (27):4479–4484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Corbett F, Oldham J, Lilford R. Offering patients entry in clinical trials: preliminary study of the views of prospective participants, J Med Ethics 1996; 22:227–231.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Macklin R. The ethical problems with sham surgery in clinical research, N Engl J Med 1999; 341:992–996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Final Report of the National Placebo Initiative (NPI), accessed Nov 2006.Google Scholar
  16. 16., accessed January 2007.Google Scholar
  17. 17. asp, accessed November 2006.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hearnshaw, H. Comparison of requirements of research ethics committees in 11 European countries for a non-invasive interventional study, BMJ 2004; 328:140–141, doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7432.140.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Emmanuel, Ezekiel J., Wendler, David, Grady, Christine, What makes clinical research ethical?, JAMA, May 24/31, 2000-Vol 283, No 20 2701–2711.Google Scholar
  20. 20.,,, accessed December 2006.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Weijer, C, Shapiro, S., Fuks, A., Glass, KC., Scrutkowska, M., Monitoring clinical research: an obligation unfulfilled, CMAJ, 1995; 152:1973–1980.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Civil Code of Quebec, Book I (1991, c.64) Title Two, Chapter I, Section I; 21.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Greenwood B, Hausdorff WP. After a trial is over: the ethical issues,Science and Development Network,, 24 November 2003.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lemmens, T. In the name of national security: lessons from the final report on the human radiation experiments. Eur J Health Law, 1999; 6:7–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, The Belmont Report(Washington, DC: DHEW Publications OS 78–0012,1978).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Final Report of the National Placebo Initiative (NPI), accessed November 2006.Google Scholar
  27. 27., accessed January 2007.Google Scholar
  28. 28., accessed January 2007.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Globe and Mail Canadian National Newspaper –http://www.theglobe, accessed Nov 2006.Google Scholar
  30. 30., accessed January 2007.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pearson, SD, Miller FG, Emmanuel EJ, Medicare’s requirement fir research participation as a condition of coverage, JAMA, 2006; 298(8):988–991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Advisory Committee on Human Radiation. The Human Radiation Experiments (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Editorial, How consumers can and should improve clinical trials, Lancet, 2002; 357:1721.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Greenwood B, Hausdorff WP, After a trial is over: the ethical issues, Science and Development Network,, 24 November 2003.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Credit for this clinical trials ribbon campaign idea rightfully goes to Donald E. Short, LLB and member of the Princess Margaret Hospital Research Ethics Board.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors ,JAMA 2004; 292:1363–1364.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Drazen JM, Zarin DA, Salvation by Registration, NEJM 356;2, January 11, 2007.Google Scholar
  38. 38.,accessed January 2007.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Beauchamp TL, Childress JF Principles of Biomedical Ethics (2001), 5thEdn, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heather Sampson

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations