Cabrera Laura Y
Michigan State University, Center for Ethics in the Humanities and Life Sciences, East Lansing, Michigan.
Bioethics. 2019 Nov;33(9):1050-1058. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12648. Epub 2019 Aug 13.
The reporting of clinical trial data is necessary not only for doctors to determine treatment efficacy, but also to explore new questions without unnecessarily repeating trials, and to protect patients and the public from dangers when data are withheld. This issue is particularly salient in those trials involving invasive neurosurgical interventions, such as deep brain stimulation (DBS), for 'treatment refractory' psychiatric disorders. Using the federal database ClinicalTrials.gov, it was discovered that out of the completed or unknown-status trials related to psychiatric DBS up to November 2018, only two had submitted results to ClinicalTrials.gov. These results suggest that, despite federal requirements to report clinical trial data, reporting on psychiatric DBS trials is problematically minimal. It is argued that a human rights approach to this problem establishes a legal and ethical foundation for the need to report clinical trial results in this area.
报告临床试验数据不仅对医生确定治疗效果至关重要,而且有助于在避免不必要重复试验的情况下探索新问题,并在数据被隐瞒时保护患者和公众免受危害。在那些涉及侵入性神经外科干预(如深部脑刺激(DBS))治疗“难治性”精神疾病的试验中,这个问题尤为突出。通过使用联邦数据库ClinicalTrials.gov发现,截至2018年11月,在与精神疾病DBS相关的已完成或状态未知的试验中,只有两项试验向ClinicalTrials.gov提交了结果。这些结果表明,尽管有联邦要求报告临床试验数据,但关于精神疾病DBS试验的报告却极少,存在问题。有人认为,采用人权方法来解决这个问题,为在这一领域报告临床试验结果的必要性奠定了法律和道德基础。