Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T22:59:39.811Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Toward a Duty to Report Clinical Trials Accurately: The Clinical Alert and beyond

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Kathleen Cranley Glass
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Advances in medicine depend not only on the generation of information but also on its dissemination. Clinically relevant data must be transmitted to the practitioners who will use it. Health care professionals in North America are aware of their ethical and legal obligations to inform patients adequately concerning interventions and treatments so that they may make informed choices about medical care. This obligation has been well described and defined by the courts and in the literature of medicine, ethics, and law. But do investigators and others who are responsible for disseminating information have any obligation to divulge adequately the results of clinical trials to practitioners so that the latter might offer the choice of appropriate care to their patients? Can incomplete disclosure of trial outcomes result in harm to patients? If this is the case, what possible avenues are available to avoid such harm?

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , Winter 1994 , pp. 327 - 338
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Canterbury v. Spence, 464 F.2d 772 (1972); Hopp v. Lepp, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 192; Reibl v. Hughes, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 880; Barber, B., “The Ethics of Experimentation with Human Subjects,” Sci. Am., 234 (1976): 25–31; Annas, G. Glantz, L. and Katz, B., Informed Consent to Human Experimentation: The Subject's Dilemma (Cambridge: Ballinger, 1977); Freedman, B., “A Moral Theory of Informed Consent,” Hastings Cent. Rep., 5 (1975): 32-39; and Faden, R. and Beauchamp, T., A History and Theory of Informed Consent (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, D.A., “Communications Linking Clinical Research and Clinical Practice,” in Roberts, E.B. et al., eds., Biomedical Innovation (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1981), pp. 177–99.Google Scholar
Stinson, E.R. and Mueller, D.A., “Survey of Health Professionals’ Information Habits and Needs,” JAMA, 243 (1980): 140–43; and Young, supra note 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M.A., “The Clinical Announcement Policy of the National Cancer Institute,” in Williams, C.J., ed., Introducing New Treatments for Cancer: Practical, Ethical and Legal Problems (Chichester: John Wiley, 1992), pp. 411–19.Google Scholar
DeVita, V.T., “Is a Mechanism Such as the NCI's Clinical Alert Ever an Appropriate Alternative to Journal Peer Review?,” in Important Advances in Oncology 1991 (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1991), pp. 2241–46.Google Scholar
Id. The Clinical Alert is only one mechanism that the NIH uses to distribute information.Google Scholar
Friedman, , supra note 4, at 414.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
DeVita, , supra note 5.Google Scholar
Hellman, S., “Clinical Alert: A Poor Idea Prematurely Used,” in Important Advances in Oncology 1991 (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1991), at 256.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
DeVita, , supra note 5, at 243.Google Scholar
Id. at 244.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Shapiro, S. Weijer, C. and Freedman, B., “The Reporting of Eligibility Criteria in the Dissemination of the Results of Clinical Trials,” manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
The following clinical scenarios were suggested to me by Charles Weijer, M.D.Google Scholar
See, for example, Canadian Pharmaceutical Association, Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties (Toronto: Canadian Pharmaceutical Association, 1993).Google Scholar
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Clinical Alert: Important Therapeutic Information on Prevention of Recurrent Pneumocystis Pneumonia in Persons with AIDS (Bethesda: National Institutes of Health, Oct. 21, 1991).Google Scholar
Hardy, WD et al., “A Controlled Trial of Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole or Aerosolized Pentamidine for Secondary Prophylaxis of Pneumocystis Carinii Pneumonia in Patients with the Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome,” New. Engl. J. Med., 327, no. 26 (1992): 1842–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Clinical Alert: Benefit of Carotid Endarterectomy for Patients with High-Grade Stenosis of the Internal Carotid Artery (Bethesda: National Institutes of Health, Feb. 25, 1991). This information was included in the journal article. See North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators, “Beneficial Effect of Carotid Endarterectomy in Symptomatic Patients with High-Grade Carotid Stenosis,” New Engl. J. Med., 325, no. 7 (1991): 445-53.Google Scholar
The SOLVD Investigators, “Effect of Enalapril on Survival in Patients with Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fractions and Congestive Heart Failure,” New Engl. J. Med., 325, no. 5 (1991): 293–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Clinical Alert: Effect of Enalapril on Survival in Patients with Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fractions and Congestive Heart Failure (Bethesda: National Institutes of Health, July 31, 1991).Google Scholar
Beck, R.W., “A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Corticosteroids in the Treatment of Acute Optic Neuritis,” New Engl. J. Med., 326, no. 9 (1992): 582–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Eye Institute, Clinical Alert: Findings from the Optic Neuritis Treatment Trial (Bethesda: National Institutes of Health, Jan. 21, 1992).Google Scholar
Beck, supra note 24.Google Scholar
Simon, R. and Wittes, R.E., For the Editorial Board, “Methodologic Guidelines for Reports of Clinical Trials,” Cancer Treatment Reports, 69, no. 1 (1985): 1–3.Google Scholar
“Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Medical Journals,” Ann. Intern. Med., 108 (1988): 258–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailar, J.C. III and Mosteller, F., “Guidelines for Statistical Reporting in Articles for Medical Journals,” Ann. Intern. Med., 108 (1988): 268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
DerSimonian, R. Charette, L.J. McPeek, B. and Mosteller, F., “Reporting on Methods of Clinical Trials,” New Engl. J. Med., 306, no. 22 (1982): 1334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, “Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals,” New Engl. J. Med., 324, no. 6 (1991): 424–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Id. at 425.Google Scholar
DeVita, , supra note 5.Google Scholar
Friedman, , supra note 4, at 414.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Weijer, and Freedman, , supra note 15.Google Scholar
Friedman, , supra note 4, at 414.Google Scholar
For practical reasons (that is, difficulties in making proof, appeal of negligence arguments to juries, and existence of situations such as hybrid sale-service transactions of used products in which courts have not definitively established a right to sue in strict liability), negligence has a role to play in product liability cases despite the modern remedy of strict liability applicable to many situations. See Allee, J.S., Product Liability (New York: Law Journal Seminars-Press, 1993), at §§ 6.01–6.02.Google Scholar
Picard, E.I., Legal Liability of Doctors and Hospitals in Canada (Toronto: Carswell, 1984), at 150.Google Scholar
Fleming, J.G., The Law of Torts (Sydney: The Law Book Company, 8th ed., 1992), at 129; and Giesen, D., International Medical Malpractice Law (Tubingen: Martinus Nijhoff, 1988), at 74.Google Scholar
Keeton, WE Dobbs, D.B. Keeton, R.E. and Owen, D.G., Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts (St. Paul: West Publishing, 5th ed., 1984), at 53.Google Scholar
Fleming, , supra note 43, at 482–83.Google Scholar
See, for example, Morris, Lord in Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd. v. Heller & Partners Ltd., [1964] A.C. 465, at 502–03.Google Scholar
Giesen, , supra note 43, at 80.Google Scholar
Conflict of interest may exist in cases where litigation is involved and the defendant lawyer must also represent the estate of a deceased client. See Bowman, F.J., “Lawyer Liability to Non-Clients,” Dickinson L. Rev., 97 (1993): at 270 and 282.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
First National Bank of Bluefield v. Crawford, 386 S.E.2d 310, 312 (W.Va. 1989) (Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia relying on the position taken in the Restatement (Second) of Torts, (1977) at § 552).Google Scholar
Caparo Industries v. Dickman, [1990] 1 All E.R. 568 (H.L.). Based on the financial picture presented in defendant's audited accounts, a company shareholder purchased additional shares and eventually took over. Dickman sued the accountants after discovering that the company was worth much less than he thought.Google Scholar
Id., per Lord Oliver of Alymerton, at 589.Google Scholar
Ivankovich, I.F., “Back to the Future,” Ottawa L. Rev., 23 (1991): at 516 et seq.Google Scholar
Id. at 518–21.Google Scholar
See, for example, Chapman v. Hearse, (1961) 106 C.L.R. 112, where the High Court of Australia held that it was “reasonably foreseeable” that a physician who stopped by the roadside to aid a negligent driver thrown from his car in an accident might be injured by another negligent driver. The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench (Urbanski v. Patel (1978), 84 D.L.R. 3d 650, at 671) awarded compensation to a father who donated a kidney to his daughter whose only functioning kidney was mistakenly removed as an ovarian cyst. Wilson, J., found that it was “entirely foreseeable that one of her family would be invited, and would agree, to donate a kidney for transplant.” Cases involving dangerous health products may also be relevant. See Sindell v. Abbott Labs, 163 Cal. Rptr. 132 (1980); and Wells v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp., 788 F.2d 741 (11th Cir. 1986).Google Scholar
Allee, , supra note 41, at § 6.02[3].Google Scholar
Fleming, , supra note 43, at 488.Google Scholar
Buchan v. Ortho Pharmaceuticals (Canada) Ltd., (1986) 54 O.R. (2d) 92, 100.Google Scholar
See, for example, Mauldin v. Upjohn Co., 697 F.2d 644 (1983); and Keeton, et al., supra note 44, at 688.Google Scholar
Allee, , supra note 41, at § 7.04[1]Google Scholar
Bigbee v. Pacific Tel. & Tel. Co., 665 P.2d 947,952 (1983).Google Scholar
Keeton, et al., supra note 44, at 685.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Fleming, , supra note 43, at 176.Google Scholar
Allee, , supra note 41.Google Scholar
Fleming, , supra note 43, at 173.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
[1932] A.C. 562 (H.L.)Google Scholar
Fridman, G.H.L., The Law of Torts in Canada (Toronto: Carswell, Vol. 1, 1989), at 263.Google Scholar
Fleming, , supra note 43, at 175.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id. See Shirt v. Wyong C., [1978] 1 N.S.W.L.R. 631; Kubach v. Hollands, [1937] 3 All E.R. 907; and Brocklesby v. United States, 753 F.2d 794 (1985).Google Scholar
Fleming, , supra note 43, at 564.Google Scholar
(1894), 3 R.J. 461 (Que. Q.B.)Google Scholar
See Filipewich v. University Hospital Board, unreported July 1937 No. 432 (Sask. Q.B.), cited by Picard, supra note 42.Google Scholar
Salgo v. Leland Stanford, Jr., University Board of Trustees, 154 Cal. App. 2d 560, 317 P.2d 170 (1957); Canterbury v. Spence, 464 F.2d 772 (1972); and Reibl v. Hughes, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 880.Google Scholar
Keeton, et al., supra note 44.Google Scholar
Picard, , supra note 42, at 152.Google Scholar
Keeton, et al., supra note 44, at 187 and 189.Google Scholar
Id. at 156.Google Scholar
Deschamps, P. Glass, K.C. Knoppers, B.M. and Morneault, B., Health Care Liability in Canada (Montreal: Quebec Research Centre of Private and Comparative Law, 1989), at 43.Google Scholar
Smith, J., “Legal Cause in Actions of Tort,” Harv. L. Rev., 25 (1911): 109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Picard, , supra note 42, at 190.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Kennedy, I. and Grubb, A., Medical Law: Text and Materials (London: Butterworths, 1989), at 426–27.Google Scholar
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the National Institute on Aging, Clinical Alert: Antihypertensive Treatment for Isolated Systolic Hypertension in Those Over 60 (Bethesda: National Institutes of Health, June 26, 1991); and “Prevention of Stroke by Antihypertensive Drug Treatment in Older Persons With Isolated Systolic Hypertension,” JAMA, 265, no. 24 (1991): 3255-64.Google Scholar
Perry, S.R., “Protected Interests and Undertakings in the Law of Negligence,” U. of Toronto L. J., 42 (1992): 309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furrow, B.R., “Quality Control in Health Care: Developments in the Law of Medical Malpractice,” J. Law, Med. & Ethics, 21 (1993): 175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
In 1987, the House of Lords held that where a lost chance of avoiding a debilitating condition was less than even, and the chance was lost due to the negligent failure to diagnose the plaintiff properly, no liability in tort would exist. See Hotson v. East Berkshire Area Health Authority, [1987] A.C. 750. In 1991, the Supreme Court of Canada, in Laferrièere v. Lawson, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 541, decided that a lost chance of avoiding a debilitating condition (cancer, in that particular case) should not in general be recognized as a separate head of damages in medical malpractice actions.Google Scholar
See Anns v. Merton London Council Borough, [1978] A.C. 728, [1977] 2 All E.R. 492 (H.L.); Just v. British Columbia, (1989), 1 C.C.L.T.(2d) 1 (S.C.C.); Dalehite v. United States, 346 U.S. 15, 73 S. Ct. 956 (1953); and Allen v. United States, 527 F. Supp. 476 (D.Utah 1981). Immunity of the federal government from liability and exceptions to that immunity are established in the Federal Tort Claims Act, Tit. 28, U.S.C.A.Google Scholar
For a discussion of liability of the Medical Research Council of Canada, a Crown agent, see the Medical Research Council of Canada, “Report of the Working Group on Liability,” (1992): unpublished.Google Scholar
Bailar, and Mosteller, , supra note 29.Google Scholar