Nanomedicine First-in-Human Research: Challenges for Informed Consent

King, Nancy M. P.
December 2012
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics;Winter2012, Vol. 40 Issue 4, p823
Academic Journal
Risks of harm, translational uncertainty, ambiguities in potential direct benefit, and long-term follow-up merit consideration in first-in-human research. Some nanomedical technologies have additional characteristics that should be addressed, including: defining and describing nanomedical interventions; bystander risks; the therapeutic misconception; and a decision-making context that includes both common use of nanomaterials outside medicine and persistent unknowns about the effects of nanosize. This paper considers how to address these issues in informed consent to first-in-human nanomedicine research.


Related Articles

  • Recommendations for Nanomedicine Human Subjects Research Oversight: An Evolutionary Approach for an Emerging Field. Fatehi, Leili; Wolf, Susan M.; McCullough, Jeffrey; Hall, Ralph; Lawrenz, Frances; Kahn, Jeffrey P.; Jones, Cortney; Campbell, Stephen A.; Dresser, Rebecca S.; Erdman, Arthur G.; Haynes, Christy L.; Hoerr, Robert A.; Hogle, Linda F.; Keane, Moira A.; Khushf, George; King, Nancy M. P.; Kokkoli, Efrosini; Marchant, Gary; Maynard, Andrew D.; Philbert, Martin // Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics;Winter2012, Vol. 40 Issue 4, p716 

    The nanomedicine field is fast evolving toward complex, 'active,' and interactive formulations. Like many emerging technologies, nanomedicine raises questions of how human subjects research (HSR) should be conducted and the adequacy of current oversight, as well as how to integrate concerns over...

  • Outsourcing Ethical Obligations: Should the Revised Common Rule Address the Responsibilities of Investigators and Sponsors? Shah, Seema K. // Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics;Summer2013, Vol. 41 Issue 2, p397 

    The Common Rule creates a division of moral labor in research. It implies that investigators and sponsors can outsource their ethical obligations to IRBs and participants, thereby fostering a culture of compliance, rather than one of responsibility. The proposed revisions to the Common Rule are...

  • Paying Hypertension Research Subjects. Casarett, David; Karlawish, Jason; Asch, David A. // JGIM: Journal of General Internal Medicine;Aug2002, Vol. 17 Issue 8, p651 

    CONTEXT: Cash payments are often used to compensate subjects who participate in research. However, ethicists have argued that these payments might constitute an undue inducement. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether potential subjects agree with theoretical arguments that a payment could be an undue...

  • Capacity, Vulnerability, and Informed Consent for Research. Biros, Michelle // Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics;Spring2018, Vol. 46 Issue 1, p72 

    This article presents an overview for clinician investigators on the concepts of decision-making capacity and vulnerability as related to human subjects research. Tools for capacity assessment and unacknowledged sources of vulnerability are discussed, and the practical gaps in current informed...

  • IRB Decision-Making with Imperfect Knowledge: A Framework for Evidence-Based Research Ethics Review. Anderson, Emily E.; DuBois, James M. // Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics;Winter2012, Vol. 40 Issue 4, p951 

    Here we describe the five steps of evidence-based practice as applied to research ethics review and apply these steps to three exemplar dilemmas: incentive payments in substance abuse research; informed consent for biobanking; and placebo-controlled trials involving pregnant women in order to...

  • Avoiding Exploitation in Phase I Clinical Trials: More than (Un)Just Compensation. Lamkin, Matt; Elliott, Carl // Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics;Spring2018, Vol. 46 Issue 1, p52 

    Lowering compensation to research subjects to protect them from “undue inducement” is a misguided attempt to shoehorn a concern about exploitation into the framework of autonomy. We suggest that oversight bodies should be less concerned about undue influence than about exploitation...

  • Successfully Navigating the Human Subjects Approval Process. Cugini, MaryAnn // Journal of Dental Hygiene;2015 Supplement1, Vol. 89, p54 

    The article offers suggestions on how to guide the human subject approval process in behavioral or clinical research. An overview on the ethical principles in all research involving human subjects which involves on beneficence, justice and respect for persons, is provided. Also emphasized is the...

  • Consent and discontent. Wenger, Neil S.; Shapiro, Martin F. // CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal;12/15/97, Vol. 157 Issue 12, p1691 

    Examines the status of research ethics and informed consent, as of December 15, 1997. Report of the United States Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments regarding tests done without participants' consent; Protection levels for subjects; Cases of scientific misconduct; Impact of...

  • Editorial. Speck, Peter // Palliative Medicine;Mar2001, Vol. 15 Issue 2, p89 

    Editorial. Comments on the formation of a Multi-centre Research Ethics Committees in Great Britain. Function of an ethics committee; Significance of informed consent in every study; Necessity of research ethical standards in the developing countries.


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics