Miller Franklin G, Brody Howard
National Institutes of Health.
Am J Bioeth. 2002 Spring;2(2):3-9. doi: 10.1162/152651602317533523.
The leading ethical position on placebo-controlled clinical trials is that whenever proven effective treatment exists for a given condition, it is unethical to test a new treatment for that condition against placebo. Invoking the principle of clinical equipoise, opponents of placebo-controlled trials in the face of proven effective treatment argue that they (1) violate the therapeutic obligation of physicians to offer optimal medical care and (2) lack both scientific and clinical merit. We contend that both of these arguments are mistaken. Clinical equipoise provides erroneous ethical guidance in the case of placebo-controlled trials, because it ignores the ethically relevant distinction between clinical trials and treatment in the context of clinical medicine and the methodological limitations of active-controlled trials. Placebo controls are ethically justifiable when they are supported by sound methodological considerations and their use does not expose research participants to excessive risks of harm.
关于安慰剂对照临床试验的主流伦理立场是,对于某一特定病症,只要存在经证实有效的治疗方法,针对该病症测试一种新治疗方法并与安慰剂对照就是不道德的。面对已证实有效的治疗方法,安慰剂对照试验的反对者援引临床 equipoise 原则,认为此类试验(1)违反了医生提供最佳医疗护理的治疗义务,(2)缺乏科学和临床价值。我们认为这两种观点都是错误的。在安慰剂对照试验的情况下,临床 equipoise 提供了错误的伦理指导,因为它忽略了临床医学背景下临床试验与治疗之间在伦理上的相关区别以及活性对照试验的方法学局限性。当安慰剂对照有合理的方法学考量支持且其使用不会使研究参与者面临过度伤害风险时,从伦理角度是合理的。