Mackillop W J, Palmer M J, O'Sullivan B, Ward G K, Steele R, Dotsikas G
Ontario Cancer Foundation, Kingston Regional Cancer Centre, Department of Oncology, Toronto, Canada.
Br J Cancer. 1989 Mar;59(3):388-95. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1989.78.
Doctors who treat lung cancer in Ontario were previously asked how they would wish to be managed if they developed non-small cell lung cancer and whether they would consent to participate in six clinical trials for which they might be eligible. The proportion of these expert surrogate patients who would consent to each clinical trial ranged from 11 to 64%. The results of this study were transmitted to the same group of doctors who were asked to comment on the ethical acceptability of each trial in the light of this information. The majority of physicians said that those trials to which less than 50% of expert surrogates consented should not have been opened to patients. Sixty-nine per cent of doctors thought that new trials should be evaluated in this way. We also present the results of a survey of 400 lay people in Ontario who were asked to imagine that they had lung cancer and whether they would consent to participate in two of these same clinical trials. Fifty per cent of lay people consented to a randomised trial of lobectomy versus segmentectomy in early, operable disease (LCSC-821) compared to 64% of expert surrogates, and 48% of lay people consented to a randomised trial of five different forms of chemotherapy in metastatic disease (SWOG-8241) compared to 19% of doctors. It was concluded that the lay people were unable to discern differences in the acceptability of clinical trials which were clear to experts in the field. Subsequently, respondents were told about the decisions which doctors would make in the same circumstances and asked if this information would modify their previous decisions. There is no net change in the proportion of patients consenting to the surgery trial but the proportion of people consenting to the chemotherapy trial decreased by 40%. The majority of lay people said that they would wish to have access to this type of information before consenting to participate in a clinical trial.
此前,研究人员询问了安大略省治疗肺癌的医生,如果他们自己患上非小细胞肺癌,希望接受怎样的治疗,以及他们是否会同意参与六项他们可能符合条件的临床试验。这些专家替代患者中同意每项临床试验的比例在11%至64%之间。该研究结果传达给了同一组医生,要求他们根据这些信息对每项试验的伦理可接受性发表评论。大多数医生表示,专家替代患者中同意率低于50%的试验不应该向患者开放。69%的医生认为新试验应该以这种方式进行评估。我们还展示了一项对安大略省400名普通民众的调查结果,他们被要求设想自己患有肺癌,以及是否会同意参与其中两项相同的临床试验。50%的普通民众同意参加早期可手术疾病的肺叶切除术与肺段切除术随机试验(LCSC - 821),相比之下专家替代患者的同意率为64%;48%的普通民众同意参加转移性疾病的五种不同化疗方案随机试验(SWOG - 8241),相比之下医生的同意率为19%。研究得出结论,普通民众无法辨别该领域专家明确认可的临床试验可接受性差异。随后,受访者被告知医生在相同情况下会做出的决定,并询问这些信息是否会改变他们之前的决定。同意手术试验的患者比例没有净变化,但同意化疗试验的人数比例下降了40%。大多数普通民众表示,他们希望在同意参与临床试验之前能够获取此类信息。