RESUMO
Notwithstanding its approval by the National Committee for Ethics in Research (Conep) on April 19, 2016, a trial of the so-called "synthetic" phosphoethanolamine (syn-phospho) pill in cancer patients raises ethical concerns. An analysis by a laboratory contracted by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MCTI) revealed that syn-phospho contained a great amount of impurities and did not meet standards of pharmaceutical quality required for an investigational drug. Cytotoxicity against human tumor cell lines and in vivo rodent xenograft tumor assays consistently failed to demonstrate a potential anticancer activity of syn-phospho. Preclinical safety studies of syn-phospho were also insufficient to support a trial of this investigational drug in cancer patients. Moreover, the ethical approval decision apparently overlooked two previous findings that suggested a possible enhancement of mammary carcinoma cell proliferation by phosphoethanolamine, and an apparent increase in lung metastases (rat implanted tumor assay) by syn-phospho. The syn-phospho risk-benefit ratio is clearly unfavorable and, thus, this trial in cancer patients does not fulfill a key requirement to make a clinical research ethical. There are also concerns regarding whether the study design is robust enough (scientific validity), and the social value of the trial of syn-phospho in cancer patients is questionable.
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto/ética , Drogas em Investigação/uso terapêutico , Etanolaminas/uso terapêutico , Brasil , Avaliação Pré-Clínica de Medicamentos/ética , Comitês de Ética em Pesquisa , Humanos , Medição de Risco , Experimentação Humana Terapêutica/éticaRESUMO
Summary Notwithstanding its approval by the National Committee for Ethics in Research (Conep) on April 19, 2016, a trial of the so-called "synthetic" phosphoethanolamine (syn-phospho) pill in cancer patients raises ethical concerns. An analysis by a laboratory contracted by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MCTI) revealed that syn-phospho contained a great amount of impurities and did not meet standards of pharmaceutical quality required for an investigational drug. Cytotoxicity against human tumor cell lines and in vivo rodent xenograft tumor assays consistently failed to demonstrate a potential anticancer activity of syn-phospho. Preclinical safety studies of syn-phospho were also insufficient to support a trial of this investigational drug in cancer patients. Moreover, the ethical approval decision apparently overlooked two previous findings that suggested a possible enhancement of mammary carcinoma cell proliferation by phosphoethanolamine, and an apparent increase in lung metastases (rat implanted tumor assay) by syn-phospho. The syn-phospho risk-benefit ratio is clearly unfavorable and, thus, this trial in cancer patients does not fulfill a key requirement to make a clinical research ethical. There are also concerns regarding whether the study design is robust enough (scientific validity), and the social value of the trial of syn-phospho in cancer patients is questionable.
Resumo Não obstante a sua aprovação pela Comissão Nacional de Ética em Pesquisa (Conep) em 19 de abril de 2016, um ensaio da pílula de fosfoetanolamina "sintética" (sin-fosfo) em pacientes com câncer levanta preocupações éticas. Uma análise feita por um laboratório contratado pelo Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação (MCTI) revelou que a sin-fosfo continha grande quantidade de impurezas e não satisfazia os padrões de qualidade farmacêutica exigidos para um medicamento experimental. Os ensaios de citotoxicidade com linhagens de células originárias de tumores humanos e testes in vivo em roedores com tumores xeno-enxertados falharam consistentemente em demonstrar uma potencial atividade anticâncer da sin-fosfo. Os estudos pré-clínicos de segurança da sin-fosfo também foram insuficientes para apoiar a realização de um ensaio desse medicamento experimental em pacientes com câncer. Além disso, a aprovação ética aparentemente desconsiderou dois achados anteriores, sugerindo uma possível exacerbação da proliferação de células de carcinoma de mama pela fosfoetanolamina, e um aparente aumento de metástases pulmonares (ensaio de tumores implantados em ratos) pela sin-fosfo. A relação risco-benefício é claramente desfavorável para a sin-fosfo e, portanto, esse ensaio em pacientes com câncer não atende um requisito essencial para que uma pesquisa clínica seja ética. Há também preocupações quanto ao delineamento do estudo ser suficientemente robusto (validade interna), e o valor social do ensaio da sin-fosfo em pacientes com câncer é questionável.
Assuntos
Humanos , Drogas em Investigação/uso terapêutico , Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto/ética , Etanolaminas/uso terapêutico , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Brasil , Medição de Risco , Comitês de Ética em Pesquisa , Experimentação Humana Terapêutica/ética , Avaliação Pré-Clínica de Medicamentos/éticaRESUMO
PURPOSE: To trace a profile of scientific publications, phase I, in order to know whether or not they show pre-clinical phase data, emphasizing bioethical aspects. METHODS: Sixty-one scientific articles, published in 2007, involving research in human beings using new drugs, medicines and vaccines during phase I were analysed. A schedule for data collection was elaborated in which it would be possible to analyse and evaluate those articles. The schedule included items related to the pre-clinical phase associated to the clinical phase, and items related to the sample characteristics. RESULTS: Most of research works were carried out in USA. Taking into consideration that a large number of works have been dedicated to oncologic affections, most of them were carried out in voluntary ill individuals. Information on the pre-clinical phase, phase I, was very poor or absent. Even though some authors consider the phase I research as a promising one and also suggest some future studies on phase II, the reader is not able to consider the same way, as long as there is a shortage of information on the pre-clinical phase. CONCLUSION: The profile of scientific publications showed that data deserve some reflections and analysis to better evaluate the publications on phase I.