Position statement on ethics, equipoise and research on charged particle radiation therapy

The use of charged-particle radiation therapy (CPRT) is an increasingly important development in the treatment of cancer. One of the most pressing controversies about the use of this technology is whether randomised controlled trials are required before this form of treatment can be considered to be the treatment of choice for a wide range of indications. Equipoise is the key ethical concept in determining which research studies are justified. However, there is a good deal of disagreement about how this concept is best understood and applied in the specific case of CPRT. This report is a position statement on these controversies that arises out of a workshop held at Wolfson College, Oxford in August 2011. The workshop brought together international leaders in the relevant fields (radiation oncology, medical physics, radiobiology, research ethics and methodology), including proponents on both sides of the debate, in order to make significant progress on the ethical issues associated with CPRT research. This position statement provides an ethical platform for future research and should enable further work to be done in developing international coordinated programmes of research.

[1]  J. Cox,et al.  Should Randomized Clinical Trials Be Required for , 2008 .

[2]  Paul Glasziou,et al.  When are randomised trials unnecessary? Picking signal from noise , 2007, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[3]  Dirk De Ruysscher,et al.  Proton therapy in clinical practice: current clinical evidence. , 2007, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[4]  Dirk De Ruysscher,et al.  A systematic literature review of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of hadron therapy in cancer. , 2007, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[5]  D. de Ruysscher,et al.  Current Clinical Evidence for Proton Therapy , 2009, Cancer journal.

[6]  T. Trikalinos,et al.  Systematic Review: Charged-Particle Radiation Therapy for Cancer , 2009, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[7]  C. Weijer,et al.  Rehabilitating Equipoise , 2003, Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal.

[8]  B. E. Lewis On equipoise and emerging technologies. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  Karol Sikora,et al.  Delivering affordable cancer care in high-income countries. , 2011, The Lancet. Oncology.

[10]  S M Rajah,et al.  Medical Experimentation: Personal Integrity and Social Policy , 1975 .

[11]  Bonnie Steinbock,et al.  The Oxford handbook of bioethics , 2009 .

[12]  J. Cox,et al.  Should randomized clinical trials be required for proton radiotherapy? , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  B. Hofmann Fallacies in the arguments for new technology: the case of proton therapy , 2009, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[14]  C. Fried,et al.  Medical Experimentation: Personal Integrity and Social Policy , 1976 .

[15]  B. Freedman Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. , 1987, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  S. Hahn,et al.  Should randomized clinical trials be required for proton radiotherapy? An alternative view. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  A. London Clinical Equipoise: Foundational Requirement or Fundamental Error? , 2009 .

[18]  Michael Goitein,et al.  Trials and tribulations in charged particle radiotherapy. , 2010, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[19]  F. Macbeth,et al.  Proton therapy should be tested in randomized trials. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.