Ethical Justifications for Access to Unapproved Medical Interventions: An Argument for (Limited) Patient Obligations

REFERENCES

• Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs and the Washington Legal Foundation. 2003. Citizen Petition of the Abigail Alliance and the Washington Legal Foundation to the Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jun03/061703/03p-0274-cp00001-01-vol1.pdf (accessed May 25, 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Agence Francaise de securite sanitaire des produit de santé. 2007. Notice to applicants for Temporary Authorisation for Use (ATU). Paris, France: AFSSAPS.
   Google Scholar
• American Society of Clinical Oncology with the Association of American Medical Colleges and the National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship. 2007. Amicus brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the District Court of Columbia, Case no. 04-5350.
   Google Scholar
• Appelbaum, P. S., L. H. Roth, and C. Lidz. 1982. The therapeutic misconception: Informed consent in psychiatric research. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 5: 319–329.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkinson, S., A. Blanc, D. Lebel, J.-F. Bussieres, B. Bailey, and A. Berard. 2007. Risk of drug interactions among children accessing drugs through Health Canada's Special Access Program. Canadian Journal of Hospital and Pharmacy 60: 114–120.
   Google Scholar
• Barnabe, C., S. G. Barr, and L. Martin. 2012. Infliximab therapy efficacy and persistence at a Canadian academic centre despite a change in access procedure. Clinical Rheumatology 31: 211–217.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, A. K. 2008. Implementing a pre-launch named patient programme: Evidence of increased market share. Journal of Medical Marketing 8(4): 319–324.
   Google Scholar
• Beauchamp, T. L., and J. F. Childress. 2013. Principles of biomedical ethics seventh edition. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bedlack, R. S. 2011. Compassionate use of stem cells for ALS: Popovers and hot air. Amytrophic Lateral Sclerosis 12: 313–314.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bender, S., L. Flicker, and R. Rhodes. 2007. Access for the terminally ill to experimental medical innovations: A three-pronged threat. American Journal of Bioethics 7(10): 3–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beran, R. G., and K. Sheehan. 1996. An appraisal of the clinical use of lamotrigine under the special access scheme. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 3(3): 239–242.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bristol, N. 2007. Should terminally ill patients have access to phase I drugs? Lancet 369: 815–816.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caplan, A. 2007. Is it sound public policy to let the terminally ill access experimental medical innovations? American Journal of Bioethics 7(6): 1–3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter, D., A. S. Kesselheim, and S. Joffe. 2011. Reputation and precedent in the Bevacizumab decision. New England Journal of Medicine 365: e3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chahal, M. 2010. Off-trial access to experimental cancer agents for the terminally ill: Balancing the needs of individuals and society. Journal of Medical Ethics 36: 367–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cholst, I. N. 2013. Oocyte donation and the therapeutic misconception. Fertility and Sterility 99(6): 1561–1562.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, M. 2006. Should experimental therapy be made available off-study for terminally ill patients? Lancet Oncology 7: 531–533.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiMasi, J. A., R. W. Hansen, and H. Grabowski. 2003. The price of innovation: New estimates of drug development costs. Journal of Health Economics 22: 151–185.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dresser, R. 2006. Investigational drugs and the constitution. Hastings Centre Report November–December: 9–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, S. J. L. 2006. Restricted treatments, inducements, and research participation. Bioethics 20(2): 77–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, S. J. L. 2013. Ethics of clinical science in a public health emergency: Drug discovery at the bedside. American Journal of Bioethics 13(9): 3–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein, R. M., and V. Entwistle. 2013. Capacity and shared decision-making in serious illness. In Palliative care and ethics: common ground and cutting edges, ed. T. E. Quill and F. G. Miller, 162–185. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• European Community. 2001. European Community Directive 2001.83.EC. Available at: http://www.edctp.org/fileadmin/documents/ethics/DIRECTIVE_200183EC_OF_THE_EUROPEAN_ PARLIAMENT.pdf (accessed March 1, 2013).
   Google Scholar
• European Community. 2004. European Community Regulation (EC) No 726/2004. Available at: http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:136:0001:0033:en:PDF (accessed March 1, 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Evans, S., B. Loff, and P. Cameron. 2013. Clinical registries: The urgent need to address ethical hurdles. Medical Journal of Australia 198(3): 134–135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faden, R., N. Kass, S. N. Goodman, P. Pronovost, S. Tunis, and T. Beauchamp. 2013. An ethics framework for a learning healthcare system: A departure from traditional research ethics and clinical ethics. In Special report: Ethical oversight of learning healthcare systems. Hastings Centre Report January–February: S16–S27.
   Google Scholar
• Falit, B. P., and C. P. Gross. 2008. Access to experimental drugs for terminally ill patients. Journal of the American Medical Association 300(23): 2793–2795.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration. 2009. Expanded access to investigational drugs for treatment use (Final rule). Federal Register 74(155): 40900–40945.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration. 2010. FDA approves left ventricular assist system for severe heart failure patients. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/newsevents/newsroom/pressannouncements/ucm198172.htm (accessed June 29, 201)3.
   Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration. 2013. About FDA: What we do: History. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WhatWeDo/History/default.htm (accessed May 13, 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Ghinea, N., W. L. Lipworth, I. H Kerridge, and R. O. Day. 2012. No evidence or no alternative? Taking responsibility for off-label prescribing. Internal Medicine Journal 42(3): 247–251.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton, E., G. Lyman, and J. Peppercorn. 2010. Availability of experimental therapy outside oncology randomized clinical trials in the United States. Journal of Clinical Oncology 28(34): 5067–5073.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris, J. 2005. Scientific research is a moral duty. Journal of Medical Ethics 31(4): 242–248.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Health Canada. 2007. The medical devices special access programme. Ottawa, Canada: Therapeutic Products Directorate.
   Google Scholar
• Health Canada. 2008. Guidance document for industry and practitioners: Special access programme for drugs. Ottawa, Canada: Minister of Public Works and Government Services.
   Google Scholar
• Hofmann, B. 2002. Is there a technological imperative in healthcare? International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 18(3): 675–689.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Institute of Medicine. 1991. Expanding access to investigational therapies for HIV infection and AIDS: Roundtable for the development of drugs and vaccines against AIDS. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Isbister, J., L. Phillips, S. Dunkley, G. Jankelowitz, J. McNeil, and P. Cameron. 2008. Recombinant activated factor VII in critical bleeding: Experience from the Australian and New Zealand Haemostasis Register. Internal Medicine Journal 38: 156–165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobsen, P. D., and W. E. Parmet. 2007. A new era of unapproved drugs: The case of Abigail Allliance v Von Eschenbach. Journal of the American Medical Association 297(2): 205–208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kass, N., R. R. Faden, S. N. Goodman, P. Pronovost, S. Tunis, and T. L Beauchamp. 2013. The research–treatment distinction: A problematic approach for determining which activities should have ethical oversight. In Special report: Ethical oversight of learning healthcare systems. Hastings Centre Report January–February 2013: S4–S15.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, J. S. 2008. Experimental medicines in multiple sclerosis and compassionate use. Journal of the Royal College of Physicians Edinburgh 39: 35–37.
   Google Scholar
• Largent, E. A., S. Joffe, and F. G Miller. 2011. Can research and care be ethically integrated? Hastings Centre Report July–August: 37–46.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Largent, E. A., F. G. Miller, and S. D. Pearson. 2009. Going off-label without venturing offcourse: Evidence and ethics in off-label prescribing. Archives of Internal Medicine 169(19): 1745–1747.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leonard, E. W. 2009. Right to experimental treatment: FDA new drug approval, constitutional rights, and the public's health. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 37(2): 269–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundh, A., S. Sismondo, J. Lexchin, O. A. Busuioc, and L. Bero. 2012. Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 12: MR000033.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munthe, C. 2013. Precautionary principle. In International encyclopedia of ethics, ed. H. LaFollette, 4031–4039. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Myerson, D. 2013. Innovative surgery and the precautionary principle. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 38(6): 605–624.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Prescribing Centre. 2011. Prescribing specials: Five guiding principles for prescribers. Liverpool, UK: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.
   Google Scholar
• Rago, L., and B. Santoso. 2008. Drug regulation: History, present and future. In Drug benefits and risks: International textbook of clinical pharmacology, ed. C. J. van Boxtel, B. Santoso, and I. R. Edwards, 65–77. Lansdale, PA: IOS Press.
   Google Scholar
• Robertson, J. A. 2006. Controversial medical treatment and the right to health care. Hastings Centre Report 36(6): 15–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross, E. 2009. Unapproved drug use: Compassionate or cause for concern? The Lancet Neurology 8(2): 136–137.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Royal Australasian College of Physicians. 2013. The use of sustained release formulations of naltrexone in opioid dependence: Position statement. Sydney, Australia: RACP.
   Google Scholar
• Schaefer, G. O., E. J. Emanuel, and A. Wertheimer. 2009. The obligation to participate in medical research. Journal of the American Medical Association 302(1): 67–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuklenk, U., and C. Lowry. 2009. Terminal illness and access to Phase 1 experimental agents, surgeries and devices: Reviewing the ethical arguments. British Medical Bulletin 89: 7–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shorr, A. F. 1992. AIDS and the FDA: An ethical case for limiting patient access to new medical therapies. IRB: Ethics and Human Research 14(4): 1–5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Supreme Court of United States. 1979. Case 78-605, United States v. Rutherford. 442 U.S. 544 (1979).
   Google Scholar
• Therapeutic Goods Administration. 2004. Access to unapproved therapeutic goods: Authorised prescribers. Canberra, Australia: TGA.
   Google Scholar
• Therapeutic Goods Administration. 2009. Access to unapproved therapeutic goods via the Special Access Scheme. Canberra, Australia: TGA.
   Google Scholar
• Therapeutic Goods Administration. 2012. Metal-on-metal hip replacement implants: Information for general practitioners, orthopaedic surgeons and other health professionals. Available at: http://www.tga.gov.au/hp/information-devices-mom-hipimplants.htm (accessed April 13, 2013).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Court of Appeals. 2007. Case 04-5350, Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs et al. v. von Eschenbach et al. En banc reply brief of appellants.
   Google Scholar
• Whitfield, K., K.-H. Huemer, D. Winter, et al. 2010. Compassionate use of interventions: Results of a European Clinical Infrastructures Network (ECRIN) survey of ten European countries. Trials 11(104). doi: 10.1186/17456215-11-104
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wicks, P., T. Vaughan, M. Massagli, and J. Heywood. 2011. Accelerated clinical discovery using self-reported patient data collected online and a patient-matching algorithm. Computational Biology 29(5): 411–414.
   Google Scholar
• Widdows, H., and S. Cordell. 2011. Why communities and their goods matter: Illustrated with the example of biobanks. Public Health Ethics 4(1): 14–25.
   Google Scholar
• Wipke-Tevis, D. D. 2001. What is research? Journal of Vascular Nursing 19(2): 63–64.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Young, P. 2009. Expanded access to INDs. Community Oncology 6(10): 478.
   Google Scholar