Mackey Tim K, Schoenfeld Virginia J
Department of Anesthesiology, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Global Health Policy Institute, 8950 Villa La Jolla Drive, A204, La Jolla, CA, 92037, USA.
BMC Med. 2016 Feb 2;14:17. doi: 10.1186/s12916-016-0568-8.
Social media is fundamentally altering how we access health information and make decisions about medical treatment, including for terminally ill patients. This specifically includes the growing phenomenon of patients who use online petitions and social media campaigns in an attempt to gain access to experimental drugs through expanded access pathways. Importantly, controversy surrounding expanded access and "compassionate use" involves several disparate stakeholders, including patients, manufacturers, policymakers, and regulatory agencies-all with competing interests and priorities, leading to confusion, frustration, and ultimately advocacy. In order to explore this issue in detail, this correspondence article first conducts a literature review to describe how the expanded access policy and regulatory environment in the United States has evolved over time and how it currently impacts access to experimental drugs. We then conducted structured web searches to identify patient use of online petitions and social media campaigns aimed at compelling access to experimental drugs. This was carried out in order to characterize the types of communication strategies utilized, the diseases and drugs subject to expanded access petitions, and the prevalent themes associated with this form of "digital" patient advocacy. We find that patients and their families experience mixed results, but still gravitate towards the use of online campaigns out of desperation, lack of reliable information about treatment access options, and in direct response to limitations of the current fragmented structure of expanded access regulation and policy currently in place. In response, we discuss potential policy reforms to improve expanded access processes, including advocating greater transparency for expanded access programs, exploring use of targeted economic incentives for manufacturers, and developing systems to facilitate patient information about existing treatment options. This includes leveraging recent legislative attention to reform expanded access through the CURE Act Provisions contained in the proposed U.S. 21st Century Cures Act. While expanded access may not be the best option for the majority of individuals, terminally ill patients and their families nevertheless deserve better processes, policies, and availability to potentially life-changing information, before they decide to pursue an online campaign in the desperate hope of gaining access to experimental drugs.
社交媒体正在从根本上改变我们获取健康信息以及做出医疗决策的方式,包括为绝症患者做决策。这特别包括越来越多的患者利用在线请愿和社交媒体活动,试图通过扩大获取途径来获取实验性药物。重要的是,围绕扩大获取和“同情用药”的争议涉及几个不同的利益相关者,包括患者、制造商、政策制定者和监管机构——他们都有相互竞争的利益和优先事项,这导致了混乱、沮丧,最终引发了各方的倡导行动。为了详细探讨这个问题,这篇通讯文章首先进行了文献综述,以描述美国扩大获取政策和监管环境是如何随着时间演变的,以及它目前如何影响实验性药物的获取。然后我们进行了结构化的网络搜索,以确定患者使用在线请愿和社交媒体活动来迫使获取实验性药物的情况。这样做是为了描述所采用的沟通策略类型、涉及扩大获取请愿的疾病和药物,以及与这种“数字化”患者倡导形式相关的普遍主题。我们发现患者及其家人的结果喜忧参半,但出于绝望、缺乏关于治疗获取选项的可靠信息,以及直接应对当前扩大获取监管和政策分散结构的局限性,他们仍然倾向于使用在线活动。作为回应,我们讨论了改善扩大获取流程的潜在政策改革,包括倡导扩大获取计划提高透明度、探索对制造商使用有针对性的经济激励措施,以及开发系统以促进患者了解现有治疗选项的信息。这包括利用近期立法关注,通过美国《21世纪治愈法案》提案中的《治愈法案条款》来改革扩大获取。虽然扩大获取可能不是大多数人的最佳选择,但绝症患者及其家人在决定开展在线活动以绝望地希望获取实验性药物之前,仍然应该得到更好的流程、政策以及获取可能改变生命的信息的机会。