Benefit in phase 1 oncology trials: therapeutic misconception or reasonable treatment option?

Abstract

Novel treatments for cancer are tested initially in phase 1 trials enrolling patients with advanced disease who have exhausted standard treatment options. Although these trials are designed to evaluate safety and to define dosing for future efficacy trials, most patients volunteer with the hope of obtaining medical benefit. Do phase 1 oncology trials promote a `therapeutic misconception' among eligible patients about the personal meaning of trial participation, or do they offer them a reasonable prospect of direct medical benefit as compared with available alternatives? Recent evidence on outcomes of phase 1 oncology trials is examined systematically, with the aim of accurately assessing the prospect of direct medical benefit for participants and drawing implications for informed consent. We argue that, in view of important uncertainties, aggregate data from phase 1 trials relating to the surrogate outcomes of tumor shrinkage and stable disease do not permit any definitive estimate of a `clinical benefit rate.' Nevertheless, these trials do offer participants a prospect of direct medical benefit. As a result, accurately informed patients may reasonably decide to enroll in phase 1 oncology trials in hopes of obtaining benefit, after considering the anticipated risks and available clinical alternatives. Motivation to enroll in these studies to receive personal benefit does not, in itself, compromise informed consent.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

King NMP . Defining and describing benefit appropriately in clinical trials. Journal of Law, Med & Ethics 2000; 28: 332-43.

Sankar P. Communication and miscommunication in informed consent to research . Medical Anthropology Quarterly 2004; 18: 429-46.

Miller M. Phase I cancer trials. A collusion of misunderstanding. Hastings Cent Rep 2000; 30(4): 34-43.

Appelbaum PS , Roth LH , Lidz CW et al. False hopes and best data: consent to research and the therapeutic misconception. Hastings Cent Rep 1987; 17(2): 20-24.

Agrawal M. , Emanuel EJ Ethics of phase 1 oncology studies: reexamining arguments and data . JAMA 2003; 290: 1075-82.

Kurzrock R. , Benjamin RS Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials, revisited. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 930-32.

Markman M. Further evidence of clinical benefit associated with participation in phase I oncology trials. Br J Cancer 2008 ; 98: 1021-22.

Arkenau H-T. , Olmos D. , Ang JE , de Bono J. et al. Clinical outcome and prognostic factors for patients treated within the context of a phase I study: the Royal Marsden Hospital experience. Br J Cancer 2008; 98: 1029-33.

Horstmann E. , McCabe MS , Grochow L. et al. Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials, 1991 through 2002. N Engl J Med 2005 ; 352: 895-904.

10.

Koyfman SA , Agrawal M. , Garret-Mayer E. et al. Risks and benefits associated with novel phase 1 oncology trial designs. Cancer 2007; 110(5): 1115-24.

11.

Joffe S. , Miller FG Rethinking risk-benefit assessment for phase I cancer trials. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 2987-90.

12.

Italiano A. , Massard C. , Bahleda R. et al. Treatment outcome and survival in participants of phase I oncology trials carried out from 2003 to 2006 at Institut Gustave Roussy. Annals of Oncology 2008; 19: 787-92.

13.

Emanuel EJ , Wendler D. , Grady C.

What makes clinical research ethical?

JAMA 2000; 283: 2701-11.

14.

Daugherty CK , Ratain MJ , Emanuel EJ et al. Ethical, scientific, and regulatory perspectives regarding the use of placebos in cancer clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 1371-78.

15.

Ratain MJ , Eisen T. , Stadler WM et al. Phase II placebo-controlled randomized discontinuation trial of sorafenib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 2505-12.

16.

Johnson JR , Williams G. , Pazdur R. End points and United States Food and Drug Administration approval of oncology drugs. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 1404-11.

17.

Shanafelt TD , Loprinzi , Marks R. et al. Are chemotherapy response rates related to treatment-induced survival prolongations in patients with advanced cancer? J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 1966-74.

18.

Johnson KR , Ringland C. , Stokes BJ et al. Response rate or time to progression as predictors of survival in trials of metastatic colorectal cancer or non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. The Lancet Oncology 2006; 7: 741-46.

19.

Buyse M. , Thirion P. , Carlson RW et al. Relation between tumour response to first-line chemotherapy and survival in advanced colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Meta-Analysis Group in Cancer. Lancet 2000; 356: 373-78.

20.

Tang PA , Bentzen SM , Chen EX , Siu LL Surrogate end points for median overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer: literature-based analysis from 39 randomized controlled trials of first-line chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2007 ; 25: 4562-68.

21.

Bruzzi P. , Del Mastro L. , Sormani MP et al. Objective response to chemotherapy as a potential surrogate end point of survival in metastatic breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 5117-25.

22.

Buyse M. , Burzykowski T. , Carroll K. et al. Progression-free survival is a surrogate for survival in advanced colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 5218-24.

23.

Fleming TR , DeMets DL

Surrogate end points in clinical trials: are we being misled?

Ann Intern Med 1996; 125: 605-13.

24.

Drunker BJ , Talpaz M. , Resta DJ et al. Efficacy and safety of a specific inhibitor of the BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase in chronic myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 1031-37.

25.

Agrawal M. , Grady C. , Fairclough DL et al. Patients' decision-making process regarding participation in phase I oncology research. J Clin Oncol 2006 ; 24: 4479-84.

26.

Slevin ML , Stubbs L. , Plant HJ et al. Attitudes to chemotherapy: comparing views of patients with cancer with those of doctors, nurses, and general public. BMJ 1990; 300: 1458-60.

27.

Weinfurt KP , Castel LD , Li Y. et al. The correlation between patient characteristics and expectations of benefit from Phase I clinical trials. Cancer 2003; 98: 166-75.

28.

Henderson GE , Easter MM , Zimmer C. et al. Therapeutic misconception in early phase gene transfer trials. Soc Sci Med 2006 ; 62: 239-53.

29.

King NM , Henderson GE , Churchill LR et al. Consent forms and the therapeutic misconception: the example of gene transfer research. IRB 2005; 27(1): 1-8.