Exclusion of Women from Phase I Trials: Perspectives from Investigators and Research Oversight Officials

Q2 Social Sciences Ethics & human research Pub Date : 2023-11-21 DOI:10.1002/eahr.500170
Margaret Waltz, Anne Drapkin Lyerly, Jill A. Fisher
{"title":"Exclusion of Women from Phase I Trials: Perspectives from Investigators and Research Oversight Officials","authors":"Margaret Waltz,&nbsp;Anne Drapkin Lyerly,&nbsp;Jill A. Fisher","doi":"10.1002/eahr.500170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Over the past 30 years, progress has been made in increasing women's representation in clinical research. However, women continue to be underrepresented in phase I clinical trials—those trials that test the safety and tolerability of investigational drugs, often on healthy individuals. As sex-based differences in adverse drug reactions are often linked to drug dose, pivotal safety information in phase I trials is often insufficiently—and inequitably—captured for females. Yet there has been little attention to how clinical investigators and those charged with overseeing the ethical conduct of these trials perceive the barriers to women's inclusion in phase I trials. To address this gap, we report on 22 interviews with U.S. phase I investigators and institutional review board (IRB) members. Our findings indicate that although these investigators and IRB members acknowledged the importance of including women in clinical trials, they justified women's exclusion from phase I trials by citing the need to manage their reproductive potential. In particular, we identified four key themes that informants used to warrant women's exclusion from phase I trials: the structure of the drug-development system itself, fears about risks to potential fetuses, distrust of women to prevent pregnancy, and concerns about risks and burdens to institutions from resulting pregnancies. We argue that these rationales reflect structural and cultural barriers to women's inclusion in clinical research that ultimately fail to respect female research participants as persons, highlighting the need for broad-based solutions.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36829,"journal":{"name":"Ethics & human research","volume":"45 6","pages":"19-30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eahr.500170","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics & human research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eahr.500170","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Over the past 30 years, progress has been made in increasing women's representation in clinical research. However, women continue to be underrepresented in phase I clinical trials—those trials that test the safety and tolerability of investigational drugs, often on healthy individuals. As sex-based differences in adverse drug reactions are often linked to drug dose, pivotal safety information in phase I trials is often insufficiently—and inequitably—captured for females. Yet there has been little attention to how clinical investigators and those charged with overseeing the ethical conduct of these trials perceive the barriers to women's inclusion in phase I trials. To address this gap, we report on 22 interviews with U.S. phase I investigators and institutional review board (IRB) members. Our findings indicate that although these investigators and IRB members acknowledged the importance of including women in clinical trials, they justified women's exclusion from phase I trials by citing the need to manage their reproductive potential. In particular, we identified four key themes that informants used to warrant women's exclusion from phase I trials: the structure of the drug-development system itself, fears about risks to potential fetuses, distrust of women to prevent pregnancy, and concerns about risks and burdens to institutions from resulting pregnancies. We argue that these rationales reflect structural and cultural barriers to women's inclusion in clinical research that ultimately fail to respect female research participants as persons, highlighting the need for broad-based solutions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将女性排除在I期试验之外:来自调查人员和研究监督官员的观点。
在过去的30年里,在增加妇女在临床研究中的代表性方面取得了进展。然而,女性在I期临床试验中的代表性仍然不足,这些试验通常在健康个体上测试研究药物的安全性和耐受性。由于药物不良反应的性别差异通常与药物剂量有关,因此在第一阶段试验中,女性的关键安全性信息往往不充分,而且不公平。然而,很少有人关注临床研究人员和那些负责监督这些试验伦理行为的人如何看待将女性纳入I期试验的障碍。为了解决这一差距,我们报告了与美国I期研究人员和机构审查委员会(IRB)成员的22次访谈。我们的研究结果表明,尽管这些研究者和IRB成员承认将女性纳入临床试验的重要性,但他们以需要管理她们的生殖潜力为由将女性排除在I期试验之外。特别是,我们确定了举报人用来保证将妇女排除在I期试验之外的四个关键主题:药物开发系统本身的结构,对潜在胎儿风险的恐惧,对妇女预防怀孕的不信任,以及对由此导致的怀孕给机构带来的风险和负担的担忧。我们认为,这些理由反映了妇女参与临床研究的结构性和文化障碍,最终未能尊重女性研究参与者,强调需要广泛的解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ethics & human research
Ethics & human research Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊最新文献
Issue Information The Prospect of Artificial Intelligence-Supported Ethics Review Ethical Issues Faced by Data Monitoring Committees: Results from an Exploratory Qualitative Study The Ethical Case for Decentralized Clinical Trials The European Health Data Space as a Case Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1