Comments on: Looking For Published Cancer Trials? Fuggedaboutit

By: M. Black

M. Black — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:47:52 +0000

I mean, where or when the hell does “the line” be drawn and applied???

Piss poor.

By: Gregory D. Pawelski

Gregory D. Pawelski — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 05:13:39 +0000

When an oncologist recommends a treatment the reason behind the recommendation may be complex. It can be a result of the doctor’s training and experience in combination with the investments made by the hospital or the doctors own research interests or their financial relationships with various outside entities.

In short, a patient and their family must be their own best advocate and get at the heart as to why a specific treatment regimen is being suggested. Don’t be afraid to ask questions to make informed treatment decisions!

Cancer sufferers are taking doses of expensive and potentially toxic treatments that are possibly well in excess of what they need. It would seem that pharmaceutical companies are attracted to studies looking at the maximum tolerated dose of any treatments. It is suggested by some that we make the search for minimum effective doses of these treatments one of the key goals of cancer research.

An increasing number of drug studies are developed through collaborations between academic medical centers and drug companies. In fact, pharmaceutical-industry investment in research exceeds the entire operating budget of the NIH. It is important to understand the influence that industry involvement may have on the nature and direction of cancer research. Studies backed by pharmaceutical companies were significantly more likely to report positive results.

Over the past couple of years, if you watched TV with any regularity, it would have been difficult to miss the direct to consumer advertising that touted the benefits of some drugs over others, especially for patients undergoing treatment for cancer. Even to the point that buses covered with “shrink wrapped” advertising being strategically placed outside major cancer centers for patients and their families to see (EPO anyone?).

Drugmakers are going directly to the consumer at a time when their products are indeed at the margins of evidence-based medicine. On one hand, pharmaceuticals advertise extensively and the advertising is manipulative in the extreme. On the other hand, even NCI-designated cancer centers do this sort of direct to consumer, hard sell advertising. And in cancer medicine, the media advertising is no more misleading than the one-on-one communication which often goes on between a chemotherapy candidate and an oncologist.

More must be spent on analyzing drug data, and the need for larger and more detailed studies to figure out why there is an association between pharmaceutical involvement and positive results.

By: Joana Ramos

Joana Ramos — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 15:14:28 +0000

Selective publishing of trial outcomes is also troubling in the face of the public recruitment campaigns around the globe by the clinical trials industry. Especially in the US, the take-home message for patients diagnosed with cancer is often that they will be both short-changing themselves and scientific progress if they do not enroll in a cancer trial. Trials may often be depicted, or perceived, as the only way to get the most cutting-edge i.e. effective treatment. Special recruitment marketing efforts are devoted to demographic groups that are minorities in the US, as well as to patients in specific other countries where CROs have set up shop. The US pitches emphasize that participation in trials is key to eliminating cancer health disparities. Along with patients, health care professionals, esp. nurses and social workers, are the specific
focus of trial recruiters. In many low- and middle-income countries, participation in trials might be the only way to receive hopefully effective treatment.

But almost no one wants to talk about the fact, except at the NIH Clinical Center or under other special circumstances,participation in cancer trials is limited to those who can pay for it, either via insurance or privately. Many cancer research centers, as well as community hospitals and outpatient community oncology practices, require upfront guarantee of payment as part of the screening process for admission to trials (as well as for standard care). The public funding behind many treatments in trials is likewise almost never mentioned.

With patient participation essential to trials, patients also need to be able to participate in trials if they so choose. And not to mention, to be able to find out about the outcomes of previous trials in order to make informed decisions about participation.