Ethics Committees in Italy: A Survey on a Sample of Oncologists

Aims and background

The mission of physicians and the purpose of clinical research may give rise to a conflict between medical ethics and human rights. All the recommendations, directives and laws regarding experimental interventions require a formal protocol, approval from an ethics committee (EC), and written informed consent from potential participants. In Italy new guidelines on handling submissions to EC were published in 1998. One year later, there was a feeling among people involved in EC activities that the immediate impact of the new rules (ie, decentralization and emphasis on pharmacological aspects of the studies) was negative. A prospective study was launched to evaluate oncologists’ opinions on Italian EC functioning.

Methods and study design

A questionnaire was administered twice to 110 oncologists involved in two multicenter trials. Nine questions were included regarding the following aspects: presence of an EC at hospital level, personal experience with an EC, average time required for the evaluation of proposals submitted, and level of satisfaction with important functions of the EC.

Results

Responses were received from 93 (first survey) and 69 (second survey) clinicians. In both surveys clinicians reported they were satisfied with the scientific and ethical aspects of EC functioning but dissatisfied with educational activities and training as well as bureaucratic and clerical requirements. At the second survey, the mean time required for evaluation after the submission of a study protocol was about 2.4 months and the level of dissatisfaction was still high for some critical aspects such as bureaucracy (44%) and educational activities and training (64%). Analysis of the change over time documented small differences (from -8% to +7%) in all aspects evaluated.

Conclusions

Despite the limitations of the present study, ie, the small sample size and the intrinsic characteristics of the Italian setting, the findings add empirical evidence regarding the functioning of local EC and clinical researchers’ opinions. This experience confirms that empirical studies on medical ethics are feasible and may produce useful information to facilitate the implementation of EC in the medical and lay community.

Intended and unintended consequences: Ethics, communication, and prognostic disclosure in pediatric oncology

BACKGROUND

The majority of patients desire all available prognostic information, but some physicians hesitate to discuss prognosis. The objective of the current study was to examine outcomes of prognostic disclosure among the parents of children with cancer.

METHODS

The authors surveyed 353 parents of children with newly diagnosed cancer at 2 tertiary cancer centers, and each child's oncologist. Using multivariable logistic regression, the authors assessed associations between parental report of elements of prognosis discussions with the oncologist (quality of information/communication and prognostic disclosure) and potential consequences of these discussions (trust, hope, peace of mind, prognostic understanding, depression, and anxiety). Analyses were stratified by oncologist-reported prognosis.

RESULTS

Prognostic disclosure was not found to be associated with increased parental anxiety, depression, or decreased hope. Among the parents of children with less favorable prognoses (<75% chance of cure), the receipt of high-quality information from the oncologist was associated with greater peace of mind (odds ratio [OR], 5.23; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.81-15.16) and communication-related hope (OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.00-6.40). High-quality oncologist communication style was associated with greater trust in the physician (OR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.09-5.48) and hope (OR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.26-7.19). Accurate prognostic understanding was less common among the parents of children with less favorable prognoses (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.17-0.88). Receipt of high-quality information, high-quality communication, and prognostic disclosure were not found to be significantly associated with more accurate prognostic understanding.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the current study demonstrate no evidence that disclosure is associated with anxiety, depression, or decreased hope. Communication processes may increase peace of mind, trust, and hope. It remains unclear how best to enhance prognostic understanding. Cancer 2018;124:1232-41. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Feasibility and Outcomes of Oncology Teaching for 5th Year Medical Students

This study explored medical students' opinions of undergraduate oncology teaching, aiming to define optimal strategies for nonspecialist oncology teaching. A cross-sectional study was conducted at Al Imam Muhammed Ibn Saud Islamic University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Between August 2014 and June 2015, 124 medical students completing the oncology course in the fifth year at the College of Medicine, Al Imam Muhammed Ibn Saud Islamic University, were given a 47-item questionnaire. One hundred and five students completed the questionnaire. Students reported that the oncology teaching fitted well with the course and that they gained knowledge and clinical skills, including understanding of how to break bad news. There was no consensus regarding whether physicians had an ongoing responsibility of care if patients were unable to embrace the treatment offered and whether pain was adequately controlled in patients with cancer. There was good understanding of the ethics of analgesia use and the need to involve patients in the decision-making process. There was a wide spread of opinion when asked if the physician should "decide for themselves how much information to give." Forty-four percent of students stated that they would attend an oncology summer school. This study shows the undergraduate oncology course to be effective in teaching knowledge, ethics, and skills and to be well received by fifth year medical students. Inclusion of appropriate teaching in medical school curricula may be the most effective way to ensure all clinicians acquire appropriate training in oncology.

Contemplating Resectability

Suzie loves to talk. A successful mid-thirties businesswoman, she is a self-described social butterfly-which made her diagnosis of tongue cancer even more devastating. She came to the clinic complaining of a lump in her throat, which in most young healthy people turns out to be benign and easily treated. But not for Suzie, who had a very rare salivary tumor arising in the back of her tongue. Its slow growth was both a blessing and a curse; such tumors do not kill people quickly, but they typically require surgery. It would slowly and relentlessly grow until and unless we removed most of her tongue. In head and neck surgery, issues of appearance, identity, function, and communication are the foremost considerations when we decide when, and whether, to operate. As the adage goes, knowing when not to operate is the sine qua non of the wise surgeon. But the inverse is also true.

Underreporting of Research Biopsies from Clinical Trials in Oncology

Purpose: Research biopsies are frequently incorporated within clinical trials in oncology and are often a mandatory requirement for trial enrollment. However, limited information is available regarding the extent and completeness of research biopsy reporting.Experimental Design: We identified a cohort of therapeutic clinical trials where research biopsies were performed between January 2005 and October 2010 from an IR database at our institution. Clinical trial protocols were compared with the highest level of corresponding publication as a manuscript or registry report.Results: A total of 866 research biopsies were performed across 46 clinical trials, with a median of 8 patients biopsied/trial and 19 biopsies collected/trial. After a median follow-up time of 4.3 years from trial completion, 36 of 46 trials (78%) reported trial results: published manuscripts (n = 35), or registry report (n = 1). A total of 635 conducted biopsies were reported in 18 of the 46 trials (39%). Six (33%) of these 18 trials underreported the number of biopsies performed. Of 33 trials with mandatory research biopsies, 13 (39%) trials reported on these biopsies. Biopsy complications occurred in 8 trials [n = 39 patients, 6 grade 3/4 adverse events (AE)] but only 1 trial reported these. Factors associated with biopsy reporting included a larger number of biopsies (P ≤ 0.001) and serial biopsies (P < 0.001). Twelve of 16 (75%) trials with >12 biopsies performed reported on these biopsies compared with only 20% (6/30) that performed ≤12 biopsies.Conclusions: Despite ethical obligations to report research biopsies, the majority (61%) of trials do not report results from research biopsies. Complications are rarely reported in these studies. Improved reporting of results and AEs from research biopsies is needed. Clin Cancer Res; 23(21); 6450-7. ©2017 AACR.

Ethical Hurdles in the Prioritization of Oncology Care

With finite resources, healthcare payers must make difficult choices regarding spending and the ethical distribution of funds. Here, we describe some of the ethical issues surrounding inequity in healthcare in nine major European countries, using cancer care as an example. To identify relevant studies, we conducted a systematic literature search. The results of the literature review suggest that although prevention, access to early diagnosis, and radiotherapy are key factors associated with good outcomes in oncology, public and political attention often focusses on the availability of pharmacological treatments. In some countries this focus may divert funding towards cancer drugs, for example through specific cancer drugs funds, leading to reduced expenditure on other areas of cancer care, including prevention, and potentially on other diseases. In addition, as highly effective, expensive agents are developed, the use of value-based approaches may lead to unacceptable impacts on health budgets, leading to a potential need to re-evaluate current cost-effectiveness thresholds. We anticipate that the question of how to fund new therapies equitably will become even more challenging in the future, with the advent of expensive, innovative, breakthrough treatments in other therapeutic areas.

Main communication barriers in the process of delivering bad news to oncological patients - medical perspective

Delivering bad news is a major aspect of a doctor's work. The literature most often refers to patient's expectations or needs, and methods of delivering bad news, while medical perspective is often skipped. The purpose of this paper is to examine competencies (knowledge, skills and experience) in delivering bad news by medical specialists in the areas related to the causal and symptomatic treatment of oncological patients; identification of major communication problems and obstacles in this specific situation and evaluation of teaching needs for delivering bad news. The study was performed on a group of 61 medical specialists in the areas related to the causal and symptomatic treatment of oncological patients, using a self-generated questionnaire based on other studies in the literature. Topics that are considered most demanding are: delivering news on the termination of causal treatment and preparing the patient/ close ones for death. The most difficult aspect of such discussions for the respondents was associated with the emotions manifested by the patient. On the other hand, doctors were mostly distressed by the feeling of taking the patient's hope away. The study points to the need for education of doctors in the eld of techniques for delivering bad news, particularly in the area of dealing with the emotions manifested by the patient and giving them real hope. The results encourage to conduct studies on a larger group of doctors.

[Therapeutic Aggressiveness and Liquid Oncology]

Aggressiveness criteria proposed in the scientific literature a decade ago provide a quality judgment and are a reference in the care of patients with advanced cancer, but their use is not generalized in the evaluation of Oncology Services. In this paper we analyze the therapeutic aggressiveness, according to standard criteria, in 1.001 patients with advanced cancer who died in our Institution between 2010 and 2013. The results seem to show that aggressiveness at the end of life is present more frequently than experts recommend. About 25% of patients fulfill at least one criterion of aggressiveness. This result could be explained by a liquid Oncology which does not prioritize the patient as a moral subject in the clinical appointment. Medical care is oriented to necessities and must be articulated in a model focused on dignity and communication. Its implementation through Advanced Care Planning, consideration of patient's values and preferences, and Limitation of therapeutic effort are ways to reduce aggressiveness and improve clinical practice at the end of life. We need to encourage synergic and proactive attitudes, adding the best of cancer research with the best clinical care for the benefit of human being, moral subject and main goal of Medicine.

Moral Duties of Genomics Researchers: Why Personalized Medicine Requires a Collective Approach

Advances in genome sequencing together with the introduction of personalized medicine offer promising new avenues for research and precision treatment, particularly in the field of oncology. At the same time, the convergence of genomics, bioinformatics, and the collection of human tissues and patient data creates novel moral duties for researchers. After all, unprecedented amounts of potentially sensitive information are being generated. Over time, traditional research ethics principles aimed at protecting individual participants have become supplemented with social obligations related to the interests of society and the research enterprise at large, illustrating that genomic medicine is also a social endeavor. In this review we provide a comprehensive assembly of moral duties that have been attributed to genomics researchers and offer suggestions for responsible advancement of personalized genomic cancer care.

Impact of Oncologists' Attitudes Toward End-of-Life Care on Patients' Access to Palliative Care

BACKGROUND

It is unclear how oncologists' attitudes toward end-of-life (EOL) care affect the delivery of care. The present study examined the association between oncologists' EOL care attitudes and (a) timely specialist palliative care referral, (b) provision of supportive care, and (c) EOL cancer treatment decisions.

METHODS

We randomly surveyed 240 oncology specialists at our tertiary care cancer center to assess their attitudes toward EOL care using a score derived from the Jackson et al. qualitative conceptual framework (0 = uncomfortable and 8 = highly comfortable with EOL care). We determined the association between this score and clinicians' report of specialist palliative care referral, provision of supportive care, and EOL cancer treatment decisions.

RESULTS

Of the 182 respondents (response rate of 76%), the median composite EOL care score was 6 (interquartile range, 5-7). A higher EOL score was significantly associated with solid tumor oncology (median 7 vs. 6 for hematologic oncology; p = .003), a greater willingness to refer patients with newly diagnosed cancer to specialist palliative care (median, 7 vs. 6; p = .01), greater comfort with symptom management (median, 6 vs. 5; p = .01), and provision of counseling (median, 7 vs. 4; p < .001) but not with cancer treatment decisions. We observed a gradient effect, with higher scores associated with a greater proportion of patients referred to palliative care (score 0-4, 27%; 5, 31%; 6, 32%; 7, 35%; and 8, 45%; p = .007).

CONCLUSION

Greater comfort with EOL care was associated with higher rates of specialist palliative care referral and self-reported primary palliative care delivery. More support and education are needed for oncologists who are less comfortable with EOL care.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

In the present survey of oncology specialists, most reported that they were comfortable with end-of-life (EOL) care, which was in turn, associated with greater provision of primary palliative care and higher rates of referral to specialist palliative care. The results of the present study highlight the need for more support and education for oncologists less comfortable with EOL care because their patients might receive lower levels of both primary and secondary palliative care.

Voluntary Informed Consent in Paediatric Oncology Research

In paediatric oncology, research and treatments are often closely combined, which may compromise voluntary informed consent of parents. We identified two key scenarios in which voluntary informed consent for paediatric oncology studies is potentially compromised due to the intertwinement of research and care. The first scenario is inclusion by the treating paediatric oncologist, the second scenario concerns treatments confined to the research context. In this article we examine whether voluntary informed consent of parents for research is compromised in these two scenarios, and if so whether this is also morally problematic. For this, we employ the account of voluntary consent from Nelson and colleagues, who assert that voluntary consent requires substantial freedom from controlling influences. We argue that, in the absence of persuasion or manipulation, inclusion by the treating physician does not compromise voluntariness. However, it may function as a risk factor for controlling influence as it narrows the scope within which parents make decisions. Furthermore, physician appeal to reciprocity is not controlling as it constitutes persuasion. In addition, framing information is a form of informational manipulation and constitutes a controlling influence. In the second scenario, treatments confined to the research context qualify as controlling if the available options are restricted through manipulation of options. Although none of the influences is morally problematic in itself, a combination of influences may create morally problematic instances of involuntary informed consent. Therefore, safeguards should be implemented to establish an optimal environment for parents to provide voluntary informed consent in an integrated research-care context.

[Not Available]

The legislative developments that led to the Three-year Degree of the Health Professions poses any health professional in the position of having to comply with the ethical and legal duty to obtain valid informed consent from the patient prior to treatment. In the present work, attention was focused on the figure of the occupational therapist.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Informed consent forms have been developed according to the specific disease from which the patient undergoing occupational therapy is affected. The following categories of sick were identified: amputation, developmental age, orthopedy, spinal cord injury, neurology, psychiatry, geriatry and oncology.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The consent forms are particularly well suited to obtaining valid consent from the patient and, at the same time, allow the occupational therapist to obtain all the information he/she needs to carry out the treatment in safety. This results improved patient compliance to therapy by facilitating a better empathic relationship with the therapist.

A National Survey to Systematically Identify Factors Associated With Oncologists' Attitudes Toward End-of-Life Discussions: What Determines Timing of End-of-Life Discussions?

BACKGROUND

End-of-life discussions (EOLds) occur infrequently until cancer patients become terminally ill.

METHODS

To identify factors associated with the timing of EOLds, we conducted a nationwide survey of 864 medical oncologists. We surveyed the timing of EOLds held with advanced cancer patients regarding prognosis, hospice, site of death, and do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status; and we surveyed physicians' experience of EOLds, perceptions of a good death, and beliefs regarding these issues. Multivariate analyses identified determinants of early discussions.

RESULTS

Among 490 physicians (response rate: 57%), 165 (34%), 65 (14%), 47 (9.8%), and 20 (4.2%) would discuss prognosis, hospice, site of death, and DNR status, respectively, "now" (i.e., at diagnosis) with a hypothetical patient with newly diagnosed metastatic cancer. In multivariate analyses, determinants of discussing prognosis "now" included the physician perceiving greater importance of autonomy in experiencing a good death (odds ratio [OR]: 1.34; p = .014), less perceived difficulty estimating the prognosis (OR: 0.77; p = .012), and being a hematologist (OR: 1.68; p = .016). Determinants of discussing hospice "now" included the physician perceiving greater importance of life completion in experiencing a good death (OR: 1.58; p = .018), less discomfort talking about death (OR: 0.67; p = .002), and no responsibility as treating physician at end of life (OR: 1.94; p = .031). Determinants of discussing site of death "now" included the physician perceiving greater importance of life completion in experiencing a good death (OR: 1.83; p = .008) and less discomfort talking about death (OR: 0.74; p = .034). The determinant of discussing DNR status "now" was less discomfort talking about death (OR: 0.49; p = .003).

CONCLUSION

Reflection by oncologists on their own values regarding a good death, knowledge about validated prognostic measures, and learning skills to manage discomfort talking about death is helpful for oncologists to perform appropriate EOLds.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Oncologists' own perceptions about what is important for a "good death," perceived difficulty in estimating the prognosis, and discomfort in talking about death influence their attitudes toward end-of-life discussions. Reflection on their own values regarding a good death, knowledge about validated prognostic measures, and learning skills to manage discomfort talking about death are important for improving oncologists' skills in facilitating end-of-life discussions.

Attitudes and Beliefs Toward Supportive and Palliative Care Referral Among Hematologic and Solid Tumor Oncology Specialists

BACKGROUND

Palliative care (PC) referrals are often delayed for patients with hematologic malignancies. We examined the differences in attitudes and beliefs toward PC referral between hematologic and solid tumor specialists and how their perception changed with use of the service name "supportive care" (SC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We randomly surveyed 120 hematologic and 120 solid tumor oncology specialists at our tertiary care cancer center to examine their attitudes and beliefs toward PC and SC referral.

RESULTS

Of the 240 specialists, 182 (76%) responded. Compared with solid tumor specialists, hematologic specialists were less likely to report that they would refer symptomatic patients with newly diagnosed cancer to PC (solid tumor, 43% vs. hematology, 21%; p = .002). A significantly greater proportion of specialists expressed that they would refer a patient with newly diagnosed cancer to SC than PC (solid tumor specialists: SC, 81% vs. PC, 43%; p < .001; hematology specialists: SC, 66% vs. PC, 21%; p < .001). The specialists perceived that PC was more likely than SC to be a barrier for referral (PC, 36% vs. SC, 3%; p < .001), to be synonymous with hospice (PC, 53% vs. SC, 6%; p < .001), to decrease hope (PC, 58% vs. SC, 8%; p < .001), and to be less appropriate for treatment of chemotherapy side effects (PC, 64% vs. SC, 19%; p < .001). On multivariate analysis, female clinicians (odds ratio [OR], 4.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-15.2; p = .02) and the perception that PC is a barrier for referral (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.2-7.6; p = .02) were associated with PC referral if the service name "SC" was used.

CONCLUSION

Hematologic specialists were less likely to refer patients early in the disease trajectory and were conducive to referral with the service name SC instead of PC.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The present survey of oncology specialists found that hematologic specialists were less likely than solid tumor specialists to report that they would refer symptomatic patients with newly diagnosed cancer to palliative care. However, both groups were significantly more willing to refer patients early in the disease trajectory if the service name "supportive care" were used instead of "palliative care." These findings suggest that rebranding might help to overcome the stigma associated with palliative care and improve patient access to palliative care services.

[SELECTED ETHICAL ISSUES IN ONCOGENETICS]

Oncogenetics is the medical care of families with hereditary cancer risk. Bioethics laws strictly control this activity. Taking into account the medical benefit and lives saved through oncogenetics when a constitutional mutation in hereditary cancer risk gene is found, the law requires that information is disseminated to the relatives. If the consultant cannot or will not provide this information, this is the geneticist who will contact the family. This is an unprecedented situation where the doctor encourages medical advices not requested by patients. The Clermont experience is shown on the application of the law and its practical difficulties. Currently the technology of molecular genetic diagnosis is changing rapidly and allows new diagnostics whether at the level of cancerous tumors or in the genome with the perspective that everyone can soon have the sequence of the entire genome with the interpretation of personal risk of cancer diseases or other kinds. It is necessary to better anticipate emerging ethical issues already raised by the first medical practices of these technologies.

The normative background of empirical-ethical research: first steps towards a transparent and reasoned approach in the selection of an ethical theory

BACKGROUND

Empirical-ethical research constitutes a relatively new field which integrates socio-empirical research and normative analysis. As direct inferences from descriptive data to normative conclusions are problematic, an ethical framework is needed to determine the relevance of the empirical data for normative argument. While issues of normative-empirical collaboration and questions of empirical methodology have been widely discussed in the literature, the normative methodology of empirical-ethical research has seldom been addressed. Based on our own research experience, we discuss one aspect of this normative methodology, namely the selection of an ethical theory serving as a background for empirical-ethical research.

DISCUSSION

Whereas criteria for a good ethical theory in philosophical ethics are usually related to inherent aspects, such as the theory's clarity or coherence, additional points have to be considered in the field of empirical-ethical research. Three of these additional criteria will be discussed in the article: (a) the adequacy of the ethical theory for the issue at stake, (b) the theory's suitability for the purposes and design of the empirical-ethical research project, and (c) the interrelation between the ethical theory selected and the theoretical backgrounds of the socio-empirical research. Using the example of our own study on the development of interventions which support clinical decision-making in oncology, we will show how the selection of an ethical theory as a normative background for empirical-ethical research can proceed. We will also discuss the limitations of the procedures chosen in our project. The article stresses that a systematic and reasoned approach towards theory selection in empirical-ethical research should be given priority rather than an accidental or implicit way of choosing the normative framework for one's own research. It furthermore shows that the overall design of an empirical-ethical study is a multi-faceted endeavor which has to balance between theoretical and pragmatic considerations.

Understanding the fluid nature of personhood - the ring theory of personhood

Familial determination, replete with its frequent usurping of patient autonomy, propagation of collusion, and circumnavigation of direct patient involvement in their own care deliberations, continues to impact clinical practice in many Asian nations. Suggestions that underpinning this practice, in Confucian-inspired societies, is the adherence of the populace to the familial centric ideas of personhood espoused by Confucian ethics, provide a novel means of understanding and improving patient-centred care at the end of life. Clinical experience in Confucian-inspired Singapore, however, suggests that personhood is conceived in broader terms. This diverging view inspired a study of local conceptions of personhood and scrutiny of the influence of the family upon it. From the data gathered, a culturally appropriate, clinically relevant and ethically sensitive concept of personhood was proposed: the Ring Theory of Personhood (Ring Theory) that better captures the nuances of local conceptions of personhood. The Ring Theory highlights the fact that, far from being solely dependent upon familial centric ideals, local conceptions of personhood are dynamic, context dependent, evolving ideas delineated by four dimensions. Using the Ring Theory, the nature of familial influences upon the four dimensions of personhood - the Innate, Individual, Relational and Societal - are examined to reveal that, contrary to perceived knowledge, conceptions of personhood within Confucian societies are not the prime reason for the continued presence of this decision-making model but remain present within local thinking and practices as a sociocultural residue and primarily because of inertia in updating ideas.

Ethical considerations for the clinical oncologist in an era of oncology drug shortages

Shortages of injectable drugs affect many cancer patients and providers in the U.S. today. Scholars and policymakers have recently begun to devote increased attention to these issues, but only a few tangible resources exist to guide clinical oncologists in developing strategies for dealing with drug shortages on a recurring basis. This article discusses existing information from the scholarly literature, policy analyses, and other relevant sources and seeks to provide practical ethical guidance to the broad audience of oncology professionals who are increasingly confronted with such cases in their practice. We begin by providing a brief overview of the history, causes, and regulatory context of oncology drug shortages in the U.S., followed by a discussion of ethical frameworks that have been proposed in this setting. We conclude with practical recommendations for ethical professional behavior in these increasingly common and challenging situations.