Eisinger F, Maraninchi D, Philip T
Département de prévention, institut Paoli-Calmettes, Marseille.
Bull Cancer. 1995 Jul;82 Suppl 3:232s-236s.
In connection with the breast cancer prevention trial (BCPT) controversy, the "Fédération nationale des centres de lutte contre le cancer" (FNCLCC) decided to clarify, with the help of various discipline experts, its position on chemoprevention trials. If in terms of inclusion, two approaches can be opposed: high relative risk versus high attributable risk, these trials share in common a considerable importance of the informed consent according to potentially prosecution. A particular attention should be given to the unambiguous definition of end-points and indicators, and to monitoring of the side effects (medical or not). Non medical actors would have to play significant interventions in the schedule, the follow-up and the evaluation of such protocols. Methodological difficulties have been pointed, for example: recruitment, observance, drop out and confounding factors. French specificity has to be taking into account for the choice of pathologies, kind of interventions and global evaluation non limited to the sole dimension of the medical efficiency.
关于乳腺癌预防试验(BCPT)的争议,“法国国家抗癌中心联合会”(FNCLCC)决定在各学科专家的帮助下,阐明其在化学预防试验方面的立场。就纳入标准而言,存在两种相对立的方法:高相对风险与高归因风险,但这些试验的共同之处在于,根据潜在的起诉情况,知情同意具有相当重要的意义。应特别关注终点和指标的明确定义以及副作用(无论是否与医学相关)的监测。非医学行为者必须在这类方案的规划、随访和评估中发挥重要作用。已经指出了一些方法上的困难,例如:招募、依从性、退出和混杂因素。在选择疾病类型、干预措施种类以及不限于医学疗效单一维度的整体评估时,必须考虑法国的特殊性。