Pediatric research posing a minor increase over minimal risk and no prospect of direct benefit: challenging 45 CFR 46.406
- PMID: 17847605
- DOI: 10.1080/08989620601104782
Pediatric research posing a minor increase over minimal risk and no prospect of direct benefit: challenging 45 CFR 46.406
Abstract
Subpart D of the Common Rule establishes 4 categories of research that may be conducted on children. One category, 45 CFR 46.406, permits research posing a minor increase over minimal risk and no prospect of direct benefit but expected to yield vital knowledge about the subjects' disorder or condition. To include other children in research posing a minor increase over minimal risk and no prospect of direct benefit requires federal review and approval of the Secretary of Health and Human Services under 45 CFR 46.407. It is widely held that children generally should not be exposed to more than minimal risk in research without the prospect of direct benefit. To justify deviating from this norm, as 406 allows, two claims must be true: (1) When there is vital knowledge to be gained from studying children, it is permissible to expose some children to a minor increase over minimal risk with no prospect of direct benefit; (2) It is permissible for locally reviewed and approved research to expose only children with the disorder or condition under investigation to greater risk with no prospect of direct benefit. The justification for (1) appears to be grounded in the magnitude of benefit to society combined with the need to study children. This article demonstrates that, even if the necessity and magnitude of benefit to society justify exposing children to increased risk, the decision to categorically restrict participation in such research to children with the disorder or condition under investigation (unless the study is federally reviewed and approved) is not justified. Subpart D should be revised.
Similar articles
-
Phase I research and the meaning of direct benefit.J Pediatr. 2006 Jul;149(1 Suppl):S20-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2006.04.046. J Pediatr. 2006. PMID: 16829237
-
Determining risk in pediatric research with no prospect of direct benefit: time for a national consensus on the interpretation of federal regulations.Am J Bioeth. 2007 Mar;7(3):5-10. doi: 10.1080/15265160601171572. Am J Bioeth. 2007. PMID: 17366219
-
How do institutional review boards apply the federal risk and benefit standards for pediatric research?JAMA. 2004 Jan 28;291(4):476-82. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.4.476. JAMA. 2004. PMID: 14747505
-
Ethical challenges in neonatal research: Summary report of the ethics group of the newborn drug development initiative.Clin Ther. 2006 Sep;28(9):1399-407. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2006.09.008. Clin Ther. 2006. PMID: 17062312 Review.
-
Improving balance in regulatory oversight of research in children and adolescents: a clinical investigator's perspective.Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008;1135:287-95. doi: 10.1196/annals.1429.015. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008. PMID: 18574235 Review.
Cited by
-
Ethics of clinical research with mentally ill persons.Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2012 Aug;262(5):441-52. doi: 10.1007/s00406-011-0287-2. Epub 2012 Jan 3. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2012. PMID: 22212724
-
Examining the Social Benefits Principle in Research with Human Participants.Health Care Anal. 2018 Mar;26(1):66-80. doi: 10.1007/s10728-016-0326-2. Health Care Anal. 2018. PMID: 27376952 Free PMC article.
-
When ethics constrains clinical research: trial design of control arms in "greater than minimal risk" pediatric trials.Hum Gene Ther. 2011 Sep;22(9):1121-7. doi: 10.1089/hum.2010.230. Epub 2011 May 19. Hum Gene Ther. 2011. PMID: 21446781 Free PMC article.
-
Novel therapies, high-risk pediatric research, and the prospect of benefit: learning from the ethical disagreements.Mol Ther. 2012 Jun;20(6):1095-102. doi: 10.1038/mt.2012.90. Mol Ther. 2012. PMID: 22652997 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical