No abstract

In recent years, several authors have argued that placebo-controlled trials are invariably unethical when known effective therapy is available for the condition being studied, regardless of the condition or the consequences of deferring treatment. Some have also disputed the value of placebo-controlled trials in such a setting, asserting that the comparison of new treatment with old treatment is sufficient to establish efficacy and is all that should be of interest. This article considers the ethical concerns about use of placebo controls and describes the limited ability of active-control equivalence (also known as noninferiority) trials to establish efficacy of new therapies in many medical contexts. The authors conclude that placebo-controlled trials are not uniformly unethical when known effective therapies are available; rather, their acceptability is determined by whether the patient will be harmed by deferral of therapy. If patients are not harmed, such trials can ethically be carried out. Furthermore, active-control trials, although valuable, informative, and appropriate in many circumstances, often cannot provide reliable evidence of the effectiveness of a new therapy.

Physical distancing is an important part of measures to control covid-19, but exactly how far away and for how long contact is safe in different contexts is unclear. Rules that stipulate a single specific physical distance (1 or 2 metres) between individuals to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus causing covid-19, are based on an outdated, dichotomous notion of respiratory droplet size. This overlooks the physics of respiratory emissions, where droplets of all sizes are trapped and moved by the exhaled moist and hot turbulent gas cloud that keeps them concentrated as it carries them over metres in a few seconds. 1 2 After the cloud slows sufficiently, ventilation, specific patterns of airflow, and type of activity become important. Viral load of the emitter, duration of exposure, and susceptibility of an individual to infection are also important. Instead of single, fixed physical distance rules, we propose graded recommendations that better reflect the multiple factors that combine to determine risk. This would provide greater protection in the highest risk settings but also greater freedom in lower risk settings, potentially enabling a return towards normality in some aspects of social and economic life.

One of the most effective ways in which regulatory agencies communicate with sponsors and guide drug development is through the issuance of guidances or guidelines. These can be issued domestically in a given region such as the United States by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or internationally through the International Conference on Harmonization. Currently, there are over 400 final or draft guidances that can be found through the FDA website. The development of guidances proceeds through a process known as Good Guidance Practices, which is intended to assure that there is an appropriate level of meaningful public participation in the development of guidance. In the past 10 years, clinical pharmacology guidances covering important areas have been issued, including pharmacokinetic data in patients with renal and hepatic impairment, dose-response studies, and drug-drug interactions.

Predicting clinically significant drug interactions during drug development is a challenge for the pharmaceutical industry and regulatory agencies. Since the publication of the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) first in vitro and in vivo drug interaction guidance documents in 1997 and 1999, researchers and clinicians have gained a better understanding of drug interactions. This knowledge has enabled the FDA and the industry to progress and begin to overcome these challenges. The FDA has continued its efforts to evaluate methodologies to study drug interactions and communicate recommendations regarding the conduct of drug interaction studies, particularly for CYP-based and transporter-based drug interactions, to the pharmaceutical industry. A drug interaction Web site was established to document the FDA's current understanding of drug interactions (http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/drugInteractions/default.htm). This report provides an overview of the evolution of the drug interaction guidances, includes a synopsis of the steps taken by the FDA to revise the original drug interaction guidance documents, and summarizes and highlights updated sections in the current guidance document, Drug Interaction Studies-Study Design, Data Analysis, and Implications for Dosing and Labeling.

This publication describes uniform definitions for cardiovascular and stroke outcomes developed by the Standardized Data Collection for Cardiovascular Trials Initiative and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA established the Standardized Data Collection for Cardiovascular Trials Initiative in 2009 to simplify the design and conduct of clinical trials intended to support marketing applications. The writing committee recognizes that these definitions may be used in other types of clinical trials and clinical care processes where appropriate. Use of these definitions at the FDA has enhanced the ability to aggregate data within and across medical product development programs, conduct meta-analyses to evaluate cardiovascular safety, integrate data from multiple trials, and compare effectiveness of drugs and devices. Further study is needed to determine whether prospective data collection using these common definitions improves the design, conduct, and interpretability of the results of clinical trials.

No abstract

Placebo controls are commonly used in clinical trials of investigational treatments because they have important advantages. In recent years, some have criticized the use of placebo-controlled trials when effective alternative therapy exists, regardless of the expected effect of the therapy. In part 1 of this paper, ethical arguments are addressed and the interpretive problems inherent in the use of active-control equivalence trials to establish efficacy of a new treatment are clarified. However, uncertainties may complicate decisions about appropriate use of placebo controls in some situations. Part 2 discusses more fully the ethical considerations for using placebo controls in particular medical settings. The value and relevance of placebo-controlled trials of new agents in situations in which proven effective therapy is available are also explored.