|
|
AIDS Treatment News
AIDS Trestment News
June 5, 1998
Contents:
For subscription, donation and editorial information and to read our Statement of Purpose, visit AIDS Treatment News' page here at The Body.
New Guide to Living with HIV Infection
|
|
One of the best general resource books for persons with HIV is The Guide to Living with HIV Infection, by John G. Bartlett, M.D. and Ann K. Finkbeiner, developed at the Johns Hopkins AIDS Clinic and published by Johns Hopkins University Press. The revised fourth edition is now available.
This book focuses on the many practical concerns (not only
medical ones) that a person with HIV may face. Topics include
emotional issues (anger, energy, depression, hope, and
others) -- interpersonal situations (such as disclosure about
one's diagnosis) -- understanding how medical care is organized
and some of the barriers to access, including insurance
issues -- the need to have an HIV specialist involved in one's
care -- hospital administration procedures -- patients' rights -- finding support, and taking control of your life -- and others.
There are discussions on caring for your health, medical
symptoms, laboratory tests, considering clinical trials,
considering alternative treatments, and some of the major
drugs used in the treatment of HIV infection. However, this
book does not include in-depth discussion of specific
antiretroviral treatments and strategies, since these change
rapidly and the information would soon become obsolete.
If you read the "Prologue: To People with HIV Infection and
to Their Caregivers," be aware that it is a speech given ten
years ago about one person's experience with AIDS. Readers
new to this area could be confused if they miss the date in
the fine print.
The Guide to Living with HIV Infection, 4th Edition is
available in bookstores for $15.95 (paperback), or can be
ordered directly from Johns Hopkins University Press by
calling 800-537-5487, Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 5:00
p.m.
|
Medical Marijuana: Largest Provider Closed, Some Alternatives Availableby John S. James
|
|
San Francisco's largest medical marijuana buyers' club, the
Cannabis Healing Center, was shut down on May 25 due to a
court order obtained by state Attorney General Dan Lungren -- creating an emergency for thousands of persons with serious
illnesses who were obtaining marijuana from the Center and
are unable to get relief from any other treatment.
City officials are exploring ways to help patients obtain
marijuana legally when it is medically recommended by their
physicians. Meanwhile, three smaller buyers' clubs remain
open in San Francisco, and there are others elsewhere in the
state -- although these will not be able to meet the needs of
everyone, due to limited staff and the intensive checking of
documentation required.
The three in San Francisco differ in their documentation
requirements and their services:
- ACT UP/San Francisco, 864-6686, may accept an
identification card from the Cannabis Healing Center or
Flower Therapy (another medical marijuana group forced to
close in San Francisco). Otherwise it requires a letter of
diagnosis and a state identification (such as a driver's
license).
- C.H.A.M.P. (Cannabis Helping Alleviate Medical Problems),
861-1040, is the only remaining center in San Francisco that
offers a space where patients can socialize with each other
and smoke cannabis there if they wish. C.H.A.M.P. requires a
physician's letter written within the last 30 days which
states the illness diagnosed and which either recommends or
approves cannabis for the illness, and states that the
physician will continue to monitor the patient; a form letter
is available from C.H.A.M.P. Identification can be a current
California drivers license or ID, passport, or SSI letter.
- Market Street Club, 861-1864, requires a photo
identification by a state or Federal agency -- for example, a
drivers license, passport, or military ID; it also requires a
letter of diagnosis, and letter of recommendation, by a
medical doctor. A patient can bring the same letters they
used at clubs that have closed, even if on the other club's
stationery. Documentation must be the original (not a
photocopy); the club will make copies for its records and
return the originals.
- Also nearby is the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative,
510-832-5346. It requires a physician's letter of
recommendation (within the last six months) that can be
verified, and a current identification.
On June 1 the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a
resolution urging the city attorney, with the district
attorney, to draft legislation for emergency distribution of
medical marijuana. The goal is to develop a system that will
have the best possible chance to withstand legal challenge,
and especially to minimize legal liability of city employees.
Even if everything goes well, it will probably take two
months or more for any new system to be set up.
Comment
San Francisco health, law enforcement, and other departments
have been working for months on guidelines for medical
marijuana, consistent with California Proposition 215 (see
text below). Proposition 215 does not override Federal laws
against marijuana, but in practice Federal authorities
usually leave marijuana enforcement to state or local
jurisdictions, unless large quantities are involved.
We hope that official guidelines or supervised distribution
systems will make provisions for patients and their
caregivers to grow their own marijuana if they choose, as
they are allowed to do under Proposition 215 -- including
growing collectively in a community garden for those unable
to do so at home. Then the price could be reduced to about
the cost of garden tools and fertilizer. This is important
because many patients are already under severe financial
pressure because of their illness.
Also, there is an urgent need for organizations which will
consistently help patients to tell their personal stories -- for example, providing professional video feed to national news media, and referring reporters to patients willing to be
interviewed.
Election Note
California Attorney General Lungren's closure of the Cannabis
Healing Center also shut the campaign office of Dennis Peron,
who had founded the previous Cannabis Buyers' Club at that
site and was running for governor against Lungren in the
Republican primary on June 2. Peron's staff was later given a
few hours to remove their campaign equipment and materials.
Many phone calls in the critical get-out-the-vote week before
the election were unable to get through.
|
Medical Marijuana Distribution Summit, Sacramento: Video Available
|
|
On May 26 we attended the Medical Marijuana Distribution
Summit, a three-hour hearing by the California Senate
Committee on Public Safety, chaired by Senator John
Vasconcellos. Over a dozen doctors, law enforcement
officials, political representatives, activists, and other
experts were invited to speak, and anyone could sign up for
public comment. A videotape of the meeting, available at low
cost, provides an excellent background on many of the issues
today.
Unfortunately the Federal government refused to participate,
citing ongoing litigation. California Attorney General Dan
Lungren did send a representative.
It is impossible to summarize such a meeting, but here are a
few things we learned:
- There are many different kinds of medical marijuana clubs.
For example, some establish a cooperative garden so that the
cannabis is provided for the nominal cost of tools and
supplies -- and do not make the patient wait the months
required for their plants to mature.
- Models with local government involvement include the cities
of Arcata and West Hollywood. In both cities, cannabis is
grown openly for patients, avoiding the need to obtain an
underground supply.
- The county of San Mateo is exploring the possibility of a
clinical trial of medical marijuana -- which could be permitted
under Federal law, since the drug would be used for research.
- In some rural areas of California, most of the interest in
cannabis is not from persons with HIV, but from patients in
wheelchairs who have severe, chronic pain and have not found
satisfactory relief with other treatments. They frequently
talk about suicide, and sometimes do kill themselves. [The
main problem here may be improper pain treatment with
approved prescription drugs. Experts agree and have said for
decades that severe pain is greatly undertreated. This
situation persists, in large part because doctors are afraid
that they may be targeted by law enforcement if they
prescribe more pain medication. Undertreatment of pain could
be worse in rural areas where physicians may be less able to
put together a legal defense if necessary.]
- There is strong opposition against allowing patients to use
marijuana at a site were it is dispensed; they must take it
away and use it elsewhere, like other medicine purchased at a
pharmacy. [This is unfortunate since social isolation is a
major problem for patients with chronic illness and severe
pain, and the social outlet has been important where it has
been tried. Many people were offended by the "party
atmosphere" at Peron's clubs; we would urge that seriously
ill patients be permitted to choose the atmosphere that works
best for them. But most cannabis clubs have had to accept the
pharmacy-only model in order to have any chance of being
allowed to operate at all.]
- In most of California, Proposition 215 has not been allowed
to work, and patients are still arrested for legitimate
medical use. Some rural counties are so poor that county
workers may not get their paychecks; the funding they do have
available is from Federal marijuana-eradication projects.
This dependence complicates efforts to discuss medical use
with law enforcement, and sometimes even in local newspapers.
- "California now has 20 times as many marijuana prisoners as
in 1980," according to Dale Gieringer of California NORML
(http://www.norml.org/canorml, or 415-563-5858). Persons using cannabis for medical purposes do get caught up in this
massive arrest and imprisonment.
- It is widely agreed that Federal cooperation is necessary
for finding a workable solution on medical marijuana. But
with both Democrats and Republicans using the war on drugs as
a political football, Washington has no interest in a
solution at this time.
For a Videotape of the Summit
To obtain a videotape of the Medical Marijuana Distribution
Summit, send a request to:
attn: Claudia
Senate Rules Committee
1020 N. St., Room 585
Sacramento, CA 95814
Ask for the three-tape set for the "Medical Marijuana
Distribution Summit, Senate Committee on Public Safety, May
26, 1998," and enclose a check for $18. Most orders are
filled within a few days. If you have questions, call
Televising the Senate, 916-445-4913.
Appendix: Text of Proposition 215
The following proposition was approved by California voters
in November 1996. Previous legislation to prevent prosecution
of patients had been passed by the state legislature but
repeatedly vetoed by Governor Pete Wilson, in 1994 and 1995.
The governor cannot veto a proposition passed by the voters.
SECTION 1. Section 11362.5 is added to the Health and Safety
Code, to read:
11362.5. (a) This section shall be known and may be cited as
the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.
(b)(1) The people of the State of California hereby find and
declare that the purposes of the Compassionate Use Act of
1996 are as follows:
(A) To ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right
to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where that
medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by
a physician who has determined that the person's health would
benefit from the use of marijuana in the treatment of cancer,
anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma,
arthritis, migraine, or any other illness for which marijuana
provides relief.
(B) To ensure that patients and their primary caregivers who
obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes upon the
recommendation of a physician are not subject to criminal
prosecution or sanction.
(C) To encourage the federal and state governments to
implement a plan to provide for the safe and affordable
distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need of
marijuana.
(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede
legislation prohibiting persons from engaging in conduct that
endangers others, nor to condone the diversion of marijuana
for nonmedical purposes.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no physician
in this state shall be punished, or denied any right or
privilege, for having recommended marijuana to a patient for
medical purposes.
(d) Section 11357, relating to the possession of marijuana,
and Section 11358, relating to the cultivation of marijuana,
shall not apply to a patient, or to a patient's primary
caregiver, who possesses or cultivates marijuana for the
personal medical purposes of the patient upon the written or
oral recommendation or approval of a physician.
(e) For the purposes of this section, "primary caregiver"
means the individual designated by the person exempted under
this section who has consistently assumed responsibility for
the housing, health, or safety of that person.
SEC. 2. If any provision of this measure or the application
thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, that
invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications
of the measure that can be given effect without the invalid
provision or application, and to this end the provisions of
this measure are severable.
|
Efavirenz (Sustiva, DMP 266) and Saquinavir (Fortovase®) Combination: Pharmacologic Interaction
|
|
Anyone taking both efavirenz and saquinavir should know that
the combination can reduce the plasma level of saquinavir by
about 60% -- which will likely result in underdosing of the
protease inhibitor. DuPont Merck (soon to be called DuPont
Pharmaceuticals), the maker of efavirenz, "strongly urges
patients taking Sustiva with Fortovase to talk to their
physicians about changing their regimens."
Currently efavirenz is not marketed but is available through
clinical trials or through an expanded access program. The
company has sent detailed information to physicians in those
programs.
|
If You Are Exposed to HIV: Guidelines Published for Postexposure Prevention
|
|
On May 15, 1998 the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) published guidelines for preventive
treatment of healthcare workers accidentally exposed to HIV
(for example, by being stuck with a contaminated needle).
While these official guidelines do not discuss persons
exposed through sex or sharing needles, many experts agree
that the situations are similar and the same preventive
treatment should be used.
The new guidelines call for four weeks of treatment, with
either two drugs (AZT plus 3TC) or three drugs (AZT plus 3TC,
plus either indinavir or nelfinavir). Whether to use two
drugs or three -- or no treatment at all -- depends on the
seriousness of the exposure. The guidelines include a
procedure for deciding what prophylaxis is needed.
Treatment to prevent infection must be started as soon as
possible, preferably within a few hours of exposure,
certainly before 24-36 hours, since animal studies suggest
that later treatment might not prevent infection When
starting drugs immediately is not possible, the guidelines
still recommend a later start in some situations, since very
early treatment of HIV may be beneficial, even if it is too
late to prevent the infection.
For advice in managing postexposure prophylaxis, clinicians
should consult local HIV experts, or call the National
Clinicians' Postexposure Hotline, 888-448-4911.
References
"Public Health Service Guidelines for the Management of
Health-Care Worker Exposures to HIV and Recommendations for
Postexposure Prophylaxis." MMWR Recommendations and Reports,
May 15, 1998; volume 47, number RR-7, pages 1-33. This
publication is available at http://www.cdc.gov/epo/mmwr/mmwr_rr.html; or single copies
may be obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, National AIDS Clearinghouse, P.O. Box 6003,
Rockville, MD 20850, telephone 800-458-5231. It is also
available by faxback; have the phone number of a fax machine
handy, and then call 800-458-5231 and select the faxback
option, which is available 24 hours a day. You can ask for a
catalog of dozens of different documents, or get the
postexposure prophylaxis recommendations by ordering document
#3003.
Also see discussion of postexposure prophylaxis on various
AIDS Web sites, including the Center for AIDS Prevention Studies or the Stop AIDS Project.
San Francisco has a post-exposure prevention (PEP) study, which runs a 24-hour information line at 415-502-5PEP.
|
Medical Marijuana Study in San Francisco: Pays $1000, 25 Days in Hospital
|
|
An important medical marijuana study now recruiting will pay
$1000 to volunteers who meet the entry criteria and
successfully complete the trial. The main drawback is that
you must spend 25 days in a research ward at San Francisco
General Hospital -- without leaving during that time, and
without receiving visitors (due to Federal rules for studying
marijuana). You can make unlimited phone calls, have access
to a TV and VCR, use the Web, and bring books and a laptop
computer.
Volunteers will be randomly assigned to either smoke
marijuana cigarettes (4% THC) three times a day, take
dronabinol (Marinol) capsules (2.5 mg) three times a day, or
take placebo capsules. There is a one-third chance of being
assigned to each group.
"Our main goal is to find out what is safe for HIV/AIDS
patients," said principal investigator Donald Abrams, M.D.,
professor of medicine at the University of California San
Francisco (UCSF), who has fought for years to get Federal
permission to study marijuana. "We know many patients use
marijuana to relieve nausea and loss of appetite brought on
by the disease and its treatments, but we don't know how THC -- the active ingredient in marijuana -- interacts with HIV drug
therapies. For example, protease inhibitors like indinavir
and nelfinavir are metabolized by the liver, as is THC. We
want to see if THC alters the metabolism of protease
inhibitors and therefore changes the concentration of the
drug in the blood, either creating a level that is too high,
producing toxicities, or is too low, rendering the protease
inhibitor ineffective." The study will also look for any
effect of marijuana on viral load, the immune system,
testosterone levels, appetite, energy intake, resting energy
expenditure, body composition, and body weight.
This study is funded by a grant from the U.S. National
Institutes of Health. Besides Dr. Abrams, other researchers
are: Morris Schambelan, M.D., UCSF professor of medicine;
Kathleen Mulligan, Ph.D., UCSF assistant professor of
medicine; Neal Benowitz, M.D., UCSF professor of medicine and
pharmacology; Francesca Aweeka, Pharm.D., UCSF clinical
pharmacist; Joseph M. McCune, M.D., Ph.D., UCSF associate
professor of medicine; Joan Hilton, Sc.D., M.P.H., UCSF
assistant professor of biostatistics/epidemiology; Tarek
Elbeik, Ph.D., UCSF assistant researcher/medicine; Roz
Leiser, R.N., Community Consortium study coordinator; and
Thomas Mitchell, M.P.H., Community Consortium program
director.
To be eligible, you must:
- Be HIV-positive and taking either indinavir or nelfinavir
and no additional protease inhibitors (other antiretrovirals
are OK);
- Have a stable viral load and have been on stable antiviral
medicines for at least eight weeks;
- Have used marijuana previously (at least six times in your
life);
- Be willing to not use marijuana for up to three months;
- Not have active opportunistic infections or malignancies
requiring acute treatment;
- Not have had unintentional weight loss of greater than 10%
in the last six months;
- Not be a tobacco smoker (currently or within the last 30
days), be dependent on any recreational drugs, be on
methadone maintenance;
- Not be pregnant;
- Meet certain other medical conditions.
For more information about volunteering for this trial, call
the Community Consortium THC Study at 415-502-5705.
|
Acetylcarnitine and Neuropathy: Call for Information
|
|
Over a year ago we published a call for information about
acetylcarnitine -- a substance available from health-food
stores, and also in clinical trials as a possible treatment
for diabetic neuropathy (AIDS Treatment News #267, March 21,
1997). At that time there was very little experience to
report, since interest in the HIV community was so new. We
did not hear from anyone who believed that acetylcarnitine
either did or did not work for them.
We would appreciate hearing from persons with HIV who have
used acetylcarnitine for any purpose, either with or without
success; this information may be useful in helping to design
a clinical trial. Contact John S. James, AIDS Treatment News,
415-255-6259, or jjames@aidsnews.org.
|
Prison or Discharge Treatment Programs: Funding Available, Proposals Due June 29
|
|
Glaxo Welcome has issued a nationwide request for proposals
"to fund innovative programs in which incarcerated persons
with HIV are linked to treatment programs while in prison or
upon discharge." Grant sizes are expected to range from
$10,000 to $50,000. These grants can be for new or
existing/ongoing projects, in any geographic location in the
U.S.
Proposals are due June 29; however, the application process
is much simpler than for most grants. The application
requires only a three to five page letter (including a
description of the project and a description of the
organization), with a copy of the organization's 501(c)(3)
letter of determination attached.
For a copy of the request for proposals, contact Health Care
Coalitions, Glaxo Wellcome, Inc., 919-483-8584.
|
Correction: Hepatitis C Trial
|
|
Our last issue announced a trial of the combination of
ribavirin plus alpha interferon for treating hepatitis C in
persons co-infected with HIV. It should have described this
trial as "the first study of [ribavirin plus interferon for]
treating hepatitis C in persons who also have HIV." Due to
our error, the words in brackets were omitted.
|
Email Experts; Librarians: AIDS Treatment News Seeks Expert Advice
by John S. James
|
|
We are looking for experts in two different areas who could
volunteer to give us some technical pointers -- probably
through a few phone calls or email exchanges.
(1) Email compatibility. We are quite familiar with email,
and know how to send text-only messages with a short line
length so that everybody can receive them correctly. But most
people do not send email that way. At the upcoming 12th World
AIDS Conference in Geneva (June 28 to July 3) and elsewhere,
we will need to provide practical advice on dealing with
issues like: different line lengths, software packages, file
formats, and relevant standards which are in common use
around the world; international alphabets; how to assemble a
useful set of file translators (including non-proprietary
ones) to read attached files produced by various applications
and emailed to lists with no regard to how the recipients'
software will read them; under what circumstances are email
messages likely to be lost; and other problems such as spam,
censorship by governments, maintaining confidentiality, and
service providers which charge for each message received.
Also, as a future project, we want to investigate the
possibility of reporting about AIDS with a controlled
vocabulary, for automatic translation into many different
languages.
(2) Library outreach. We need help in developing outreach to
get AIDS Treatment News into libraries -- public, university,
corporate, and other. We have had no organized marketing to
libraries before, and our presence there is poor. We need to
know how libraries place orders, what their financial,
seasonal, and other constraints are, what listings, catalogs,
or Web sites we should appear in, how we should advise
library users who want their library to carry AIDS Treatment News, etc.
(3) Database research advice. For over ten years we have used
Dialog Information Services (now The Dialog Corporation) for
specialized searches; it was expensive but we paid only for
what we used. This month Dialog begins charging a minimum
bill of $75 per month ($900 per year), so we need to find
alternatives. This is a good time to review and update our
entire database search strategy.
The information most important to us -- AIDSLINE/MEDLINE, and
Web sites and searches -- is already available without charge.
We need strategies for occasional specialized searches -- especially for finding available databases, and working with an affordable information broker when necessary.
If you can help us in any of these areas, call or email John
S. James, 415-255-6259 or jjames@aidsnews.org.
|
Prospective Case Series in Clinical Trial Design -- Proposal, and NTZ Example
by John S. James
|
|
Recently the drug NTZ was rejected by an FDA advisory
committee -- even though it is widely agreed that NTZ appears
to be safe and may have value for treating cryptosporidiosis
and other intestinal parasites. The rejection happened
because the major clinical trial comparing NTZ to placebo in
people with cryptosporidiosis had to be canceled recently,
since very few patients volunteered. The FDA realized that it
would be impossible to run such a trial in the U.S., and
allowed UNIMED Pharmaceuticals, the drug's developer, to
present what data it had. But this information -- never
intended to be the pivotal data for approving the drug -- did
not convince the FDA's analysts or the advisory committee
that NTZ was or was not effective for treating this disease.
We believe this debacle happened because in modern medical
research -- and especially in AIDS -- only one kind of clinical
trial is likely to be taken seriously: the randomized
controlled trial, in which volunteers are randomly assigned
to receive either the drug being studied, or a standard
treatment for the illness (or placebo if there is no standard
treatment, as with cryptosporidiosis). Certainly this kind of
trial has unique advantages, and will continue to be
important in medical research.
But what happens when a controlled trial is not feasible? Do
we throw up our hands and either refuse to study the drug at
all, or try to analyze data which was collected incidentally
during medical care, with little or no thought for research?
Today there is usually no other choice.
To help stimulate thinking about different kinds of clinical
research, we suggest a different kind of trial, a prospective
case series -- an organized system of case studies in which the
research team does the best it can for each patient, using
any available treatments (approved or experimental) and
absolutely first class documentation and data collection. The
goal would not be statistical proof, but a document in which
the physician-researchers tell what they have learned about
how to treat the illness effectively, and use the data
generated to explain why they have come to believe what they
do. The full data itself could also be published, allowing
others to suggest different interpretations or conclusions.
Design and Size of Study
A team of physicians and researchers would design the study.
They would decide such issues as which patients can enroll,
what drugs would be available, what laboratory and other
tests could be provided, and how many volunteers could be
accepted.
Unlike controlled trials which seek statistical answers, the
studies we are suggesting do not have a minimum size which
can be calculated mathematically. The number of volunteers
might typically be ten to 40 -- but it might be as few as one,
or it could depend on the resources available. Patients can
be treated and studied as they arrive, and the researchers
will not necessarily have to decide in advance on the total
number of volunteers.
Entry Criteria
In the case of NTZ, one of the problems with the controlled
trial (the one which had to be stopped because it did not
recruit) was the time and difficulty of reaching a confirmed
diagnosis of cryptosporidiosis. Researchers might avoid this
problem by designing clear entry criteria for suspected
cryptosporidiosis -- or for diarrhea which is suspected to be
caused by unidentified protozoa or bacteria. This approach
might be the more practical, since NTZ is probably safe and
is one of the broadest spectrum anti-parasite drugs known -- and typically in medical practice, diagnosing exactly which pathogens are causing diarrhea can be difficult or impossible. Instead of waiting for an exact diagnosis, it may
be better to treat certain patients empirically for a short
time, and discontinue the drug if their symptoms do not
improve. (Of course samples would be collected before
treatment began, so that changes in microbiology could be
recorded, and correlated with changes in symptoms.)
Treatment
The goal of the physicians and researchers running the trial
would be to provide the best possible treatment for each
volunteer all the time -- using almost anything (of course with
the consent of the volunteer, who would have at least one
treating physician independent of the trial).
For example, controlled trials typically give a fixed dose of
one drug for a predetermined time, then collect statistics on
what fraction of patients benefited. In a prospective case
series, the researchers would try to control the disease in
every volunteer; drug doses could be increased or decreased,
as appropriate for that individual. Or the study drug could
be combined with other drugs (such as NTZ with azithromycin,
which is also broad spectrum, and may have some activity
against cryptosporidiosis).
With the volunteer's consent, the researchers might decide to
stop treatment early to see if symptoms return, and start
treatment again if they do. This kind of rechallenge can
greatly increase confidence that the drug is (or is not)
active in that particular person.
In some cases the researchers might decide that it was best
for a volunteer not to use the study drug at all. The person
could still stay in the trial and be monitored, could receive
other treatments, and would be included in the analysis.
Data Collection
While the protocol for treatment would be flexible, the
protocol for documentation and data collection would be
exacting. Such information as laboratory tests, concomitant
medications, and rationale for treatment strategies would be
recorded at strictly defined times, and with pre-defined
procedures for quality control.
Ethical Supervision
How could such a flexible study -- where there is no rigid
treatment protocol, and drugs can be changed at any time -- be
effectively controlled by an IRB (Institutional Review
Board)?
One approach is to have the IRB approve a different kind of
protocol which is really an "envelope," defining all the
drugs, tests, and treatment strategies which are likely to be
used in the trial. In exceptional cases where the researchers
want to go outside the envelope, due to new information or to
a volunteer's special circumstances, they would need
permission either from the full IRB, or from a committee
which the IRB had designated for that purpose.
Also, every volunteer should have a treating physician who is
unconnected to the research project. This physician would
have access to all the information gathered about the
patient, and could advise the patient to withhold consent for
any treatment or procedure.
Advantages
This kind of trial combines the best available medical care
with excellent data collection for research. Here are some
advantages:
- The approach focuses directly on extending the standard of
care as a whole -- instead of testing just one drug at a time,
due to commercial constraints. It provides a planned,
coherent program of many case studies planned in advance and
happening at once.
- Recruitment should not be a problem, since volunteers will
be cared for by a team of leading experts who can use all
available information and treatments, who can change
treatment at any time, and who are always trying for the best
treatment for each individual.
- Total cost should be small since relatively few volunteers
are needed. And this kind of study can start quickly without
waiting for extensive resources to be assembled, since no
minimum number of subjects is needed, and useful information
starts being generated with the first one. Also, results from
the first few volunteers can provide a database to help
justify additional funding or resources if necessary.
- Results can be released as they are generated. There is no
need for secrecy -- unlike conventional controlled trials,
where information learned early can threaten later adherence
to the treatment protocol. Here it is intended that treatment
will change as new information becomes available. The goal is
always the best treatment of the individual, using all
existing information toward that end.
- Even if it fails to produce definitive or convincing proof
of drug efficacy, a prospective case series can provide
highly reliable information about what leading physicians are
doing, what problems they face, and some of the results they
are seeing -- information which can help in the design of
subsequent controlled trials.
- This approach does not produce statistical proof like
controlled trials do. But it may lead to comparable or even
better confidence in the conclusions drawn. When a controlled
trial reaches the p=.05 statistical significance level which
is usually acceptable, there is (by definition) one chance in
20 that a worthless drug will pass as effective. In the
design we suggest, well-informed physicians will gain
experience with the drug under research conditions -- including
seeing how symptoms respond to repeated rechallenge, if
appropriate. Although it is impossible to calculate an exact
probability, it seems likely that after such a trial, a
worthless drug may well have less than a one in 20 chance of
being considered effective.
- Instead of organizing study design around p-values,
statistical analysis can focus on broader issues of using
available information to assist decision making under
uncertainty.
- Medically, this kind of trial focuses on exactly the issues
that treating physicians face. Treatment is contemporaneous,
meaning that the strategies being tested are the ones which
leading medical experts are using that day. In contrast,
conventional controlled trials test strategies which were
current when the trial was designed, often several years
before. And they test treatment by protocol, which usually
differs greatly from medical practice.
We believe these advantages justify serious attention to this
kind of trial -- a planned yet very flexible case series which
is designed prospectively and run under research conditions.
Such studies could be used when controlled trials are not
feasible, as with NTZ today. Also, a prospective case series
could rapidly provide practical information useful in
designing randomized controlled trials which are well focused
on provable and clinically relevant questions.
ISSN # 1052-4207
Copyright 1998 by John S. James. Permission granted for noncommercial reproduction, provided that our address
and phone number are included if more than short quotations are used.
|
This article was provided by AIDS Treatment News.
|
|