Caplan Arthur, Zink Amanda
NYU, Langone Medical Center, New York, New York.
NYU, Langone Medical Center, New York, New York.
Clin Ther. 2014 Mar 1;36(3):421-4. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2014.02.002. Epub 2014 Mar 6.
The ethical challenges of reporting and managing adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) in the context of mass drug administration (MDA) for the treatment of neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) require reassessment of domestic and international policies on a global scale. Although the World Health Organization has set forth AE/SAE guidelines specifically for NTD MDA that incorporate suspected causality, and recommends that only SAEs get reported in this setting, most regulatory agencies continue to require the reporting of all SAEs exhibiting even a merely temporal relationship to activities associated with an MDA program. This greatly increases the potential for excess "noise" and undue risk aversion and is not only impractical but arguably unethical where huge proportions of populations are being treated for devastating diseases, and no good baseline exists against which to compare possible AE/SAE reports. Other population-specific variables that might change the way drug safety ought to be assessed include differing efficacy rates of a drug, background morbidity/mortality rates of the target disease in question, the growth rate of the incidence of disease, the availability of rescue or salvage therapies, and the willingness of local populations to take risks that other populations might not. The fact that NTDs are controllable and potentially eradicable with well-tolerated, effective, existing drugs might further alter our assessment of MDA safety and AE/SAE tolerability. At the same time, diffuseness of population, communication barriers, lack of resources, and other difficult surveillance challenges may present in NTD-affected settings. These limitations could impair the ability to monitor an MDA program's success, as well as hinder efforts to obtain informed consent or provide rescue therapy. Denying beneficial research interventions and MDA programs intended to benefit millions requires sound ethical justification based on more than the identification of and rote response to AEs and SAEs.
在大规模药物管理(MDA)用于治疗被忽视热带病(NTDs)的背景下,报告和管理不良事件(AEs)及严重不良事件(SAEs)所面临的伦理挑战,需要在全球范围内重新评估国内和国际政策。尽管世界卫生组织已专门针对NTDs的MDA制定了包含疑似因果关系的AE/SAE指南,并建议在此情况下仅报告SAEs,但大多数监管机构仍要求报告所有与MDA项目相关活动表现出哪怕只是暂时关联的SAEs。这极大地增加了产生过多“噪音”和过度规避风险的可能性,不仅不切实际,而且在大量人群正接受毁灭性疾病治疗且没有良好基线可用于比较可能的AE/SAE报告的情况下,可以说是不道德的。其他可能改变药物安全性评估方式的特定人群变量包括药物的不同有效率、所涉目标疾病的背景发病率/死亡率、疾病发病率的增长率、救援或挽救疗法的可及性,以及当地人群承担其他人群可能不会承担风险的意愿。NTDs可通过耐受性良好、有效的现有药物得到控制甚至根除这一事实,可能会进一步改变我们对MDA安全性和AE/SAE耐受性的评估。与此同时,在受NTDs影响的地区可能存在人群分散、沟通障碍、资源匮乏以及其他困难的监测挑战。这些限制可能会损害监测MDA项目成功与否的能力,也会阻碍获取知情同意或提供救援治疗的努力。拒绝旨在使数百万人受益的有益研究干预措施和MDA项目,需要基于对AE和SAE的识别及机械应对之外的合理伦理依据。