• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

An Inconvenient Truth: This Is a Woman

Don’t Get Angry, Get Active!

Hide Search

The FDA Fails To Protect Patient Rights

H. Sandra Chevalier-Batik · June 7, 2008 ·

The Food and Drug Administration should rethink its rejection of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Later this year, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will adopt new standards for human clinical trials conducted without its advance sign-off in foreign countries. The rules will govern whether data from such trials can be used in applications to market the drug in question in the United States. Although these new standards specify how to run such trials to meet US requirements, they are worryingly silent on key issues relating to human rights, in contrast with the rules currently in effect. As a result, they could open the way to some ethically fraught decisions.

Take the case of the drug Surfaxin, a synthetic, inhaled version of a lung protein the absence of which is a leading cause of death in premature infants. Back in 2001, the drug’s manufacturer, Discovery Labs of Warrington, Pennsylvania, was looking for a suitable location in Latin America to run a trial on the therapy. But rather than compare its product to one of the several effective drugs already available, Discovery Labs was proposing to administer a placebo to the 325 infants in the control group.

The trial was redesigned only after the FDA — and unfavorable media attention — reminded Discovery Labs that a placebo-controlled trial of this type would be deemed unethical in the United States, and other developed countries, because effective treatments were available. As a result, the control group received alternative active treatments.

The FDA estimates that annually it receives data from around 575 foreign drug trials conducted without its knowledge, more and more of which come from trials run in the developing world. Currently, these trials must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki (or with local country laws, whichever offer the most protection) if sponsors want to use the data to win US marketing approval. The declaration, adopted in 1964, and revised several times since, is today endorsed by medical associations from 85 countries. It is widely considered to be the bedrock of protection for research subjects. Its 1989 revision, which the FDA uses as its present standard, states that any patient in any trial “should be assured of the best proven diagnostic and therapeutic method”.

“The FDA risks sending a message that ethical considerations are

expendable when research subjects live half a world away.”

Yet the FDA announced last month that it will shelve the declaration. Starting in October, the FDA intends to adopt a new standard it calls Good Clinical Practice (GCP), which is modelled on a 1996 document developed by drug regulators and pharmaceutical industry representatives from the United States, the European Union and Japan. Although GCP deals with subject protection, it is in essence a manual on how to conduct rigorous clinical trials, not a human-rights document. For instance, whereas Helsinki explicitly discourages the use of placebos for serious conditions where proven therapies exist, GCP is silent on this issue. So under the GCP guidelines, the FDA could accept data from Surfaxin placebo trials of the future.

The FDA argues that it should not be bound by Helsinki because the declaration is devised by a group it does not control, and is subject to periodic revisions that could confuse trial sponsors or contradict US law. But it is tempting to conclude that the FDA is dropping Helsinki not because it is changeable, but because the agency disagrees with the way it has been changing — in particular with its constraints on the use of placebos. (The US agency is more favourably disposed to placebo use than, say, its European counterparts.)

It makes sense for the FDA to adopt the GCP standard, giving foreign-based researchers guidelines that should help them generate the best data. But if the FDA jettisons Helsinki, the critical underpinning for such efforts, it risks sending a message that ethical considerations are expendable when research subjects live half a world away.

Sources: Nature, International Weekly Journal of Science Editorial

Nature 453, 427-428 (22 May 2008) Published online 21 May 2008

Share

Filed Under: Big Pharma Watch, FDA Clinical Trials, FDA Failure To Protect, Follow The Money Tagged With: Big Pharma Watch, FDA Approvals, FDA Clinical Trials, FDA Failure To Protect, FDA Press Release, Follow The Money

Primary Sidebar

Categories

  • Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Medications
  • Big Pharma Watch
  • Biotech Industry
  • Birth Control
  • Breast Cancer
  • cáncer de cuello uterino
  • Cancer Research
  • Cervarix
  • Cervical Cancer
  • Clinical Trials
  • Diabetes
  • Domestic Violence
  • Drug Approvals
  • Emotional Health
  • FDA
  • FDA Black Box Warning
  • FDA Clinical Trials
  • FDA Failure To Protect
  • FDA Product Recall
  • Follow The Money
  • Gardasil
  • Gardasil®
  • Gender Bias
  • Gender Politics
  • genital warts
  • Guillain-Barre Syndrome
  • Hormone Cycle
  • HPV Infection
  • HPV Vaccine
  • HRT
  • HRT Side Effects
  • Influenza A Virus H1N1 Strain
  • Mammograms
  • Mandatory HPV Vaccination Policies
  • Medical Technology
  • Menopause
  • MERCK Watch
  • MMR vaccine
  • National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
  • PAP Test
  • Prescription Drug Side Effects
  • Proactive Nutrition
  • Product Recall
  • Reproductive Health
  • Sexual Dysfunction
  • Sleep Loss
  • STD Infection
  • Stroke
  • Take Action!
  • Uncategorized
  • Unwanted Pregnancy
  • Vaccination Policy
  • VAERS
  • vaginal yeast infection
  • Virginity
  • Weight Gain
  • Women's Health
  • Women's Rights
  • Work Place Issues
  • World Health Organization
  • Yeast Infection
  • Your Body/Your Self

Archives

  • February 2010
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • March 2006
  • September 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • December 2004
April 2025
S M T W T F S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  
« Feb    

Breast Cancer

  • Cancer Advocacy

Health Advocacy

  • Women’s Universal Health Initiative

Syndication

  • FDA MedWatch

Tags

Big Pharma Watch Birth Control Breast Cancer Cancer Cancer Research CDC Cervarix Cervical Cancer Children's Health Exploitive Behavior FDA FDA Approvals FDA Clinical Trials FDA Failure To Protect FDA Press Release Follow The Money Gardasil Gardasil Adverse Event Gardasil® GlaxoSmithKline GlaxoSmithKline Cervarix Gynecology H1N1 "swine flu" virus H1N1 pandemic influenza preparedness efforts Health Advisory HPV HPV-Associated Cervical Cancer HPV-Vaccination HPV Infection HPV Vaccine HRT Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Infection Merck PAP SMEAR PAP Test Proactive Nutrition Questionable Medicine STD Infection STD Vaccination swine flu vaccine Swine flu vaccine production Take Action! Uncategorized Woman’s Health Your Body/Your Self

Copyright © 2010-2025 Hands On WordPress · All Rights Reserved