This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Community: Knowledge & Support

Welcome to the world's leading forum on Multiple Sclerosis research, support, and knowledge. For over 10 years, This is MS has provided an unbiased community dedicated to Multiple Sclerosis patients, caregivers, and affected loved ones.
It is currently Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:30 am


All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu May 19, 2011 9:51 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 2995
Location: Brooklyn, New York
1eye wrote:
drsclafani wrote:
Cece wrote:
codefellow wrote:
MarkW wrote:
I challenge the need to sedate patients (extra drug usage) just to attempt to blind patients...........not ethical.

MarkW


If patient gives informed consent for blinding and extra drug usage and knows he/she may not get actual treatment, where is the ethical breach?

There's a risk taken with no benefit to the patient.


cece
there must be no coercion, patients must be treated with dignity and privacy, and they must be appraised of the risks

Patients do not have to choose to be a trial patient.


This one is one I know something about. There is an unspoken coercion by the implication that the trial is the only hope you have. That is emphasized, I believe, unethically, when it is given last as a treatment option. I think denial of treatments that have worked in the past to patients who plead for them, regardless of the doctor's expectation of them working, is unethical, and is used unethically as part of the coercion to trials which are much more interesting to the doctor than to the patient. I was swayed by the last argument, that I did not have to do anything. I was interested in the result. Like the doctor, I was just plain curious. What a situation to be in!


gary siskin's trial requiredd that patients have the option of treatment outside of trial in order for the trial to be approved.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2011 3:18 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 209
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Sal, are you aware of any of the details of the methodoloy sisken's trial? ie how is a jugular or azygous vein stenosis defined? what are the end points of treatment? etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Thanks for the thread
PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2011 3:40 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 3:00 pm
Posts: 1064
Location: Oxfordshire, England
Thanks for the thread everyone, really educational. I had been told that ethics committee approval was getting tougher........

drsclafani wrote:
1eye wrote:
drsclafani wrote:
Cece wrote:
codefellow wrote:
MarkW wrote:

I challenge the need to sedate patients (extra drug usage) just to attempt to blind patients...........not ethical.
MarkW

If patient gives informed consent for blinding and extra drug usage and knows he/she may not get actual treatment, where is the ethical breach?
Codefellow

There's a risk taken with no benefit to the patient.
Cece

there must be no coercion, patients must be treated with dignity and privacy, and they must be appraised of the risks
Patients do not have to choose to be a trial patient.
Dr S

This one is one I know something about. There is an unspoken coercion by the implication that the trial is the only hope you have. That is emphasized, I believe, unethically, when it is given last as a treatment option. I think denial of treatments that have worked in the past to patients who plead for them, regardless of the doctor's expectation of them working, is unethical, and is used unethically as part of the coercion to trials which are much more interesting to the doctor than to the patient. I was swayed by the last argument, that I did not have to do anything. I was interested in the result. Like the doctor, I was just plain curious. What a situation to be in!
1eye

gary siskin's trial required that patients have the option of treatment outside of trial in order for the trial to be approved.
Dr S

_________________
Mark Walker - Oxfordshire, England. Registered Pharmacist (UK). 10 years of study around MS.
Mark's CCSVI Report 7-Mar-11:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/8359854/MS-experts-in-Britain-have-to-open-their-minds.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Trial Design Issues
PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2011 4:00 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 3:00 pm
Posts: 1064
Location: Oxfordshire, England
This a question to myself to ponder and for anyone thinking about designing a trial to think about.

A diagnosis of CCSVI syndrome in a trial is likely to need different treatments according to what is found (valve problems, webs, septa etc) and where (IJV, azygous, iliac etc). Clinical trial design tries to use just one treatment protocol (in order to reduce variation). These two trial goals are in conflict.

My thinking says that however carefully trials are designed and performed, they will be challenged by Neuros. They will say there is no double blinding, no real control arm, etc etc.

I still think the only way to overcome the Neuros is to conduct a very large number of open label trials (5000+). A few simple measures of changes need to be performed - cognitive fatigue measure ?? temperature of hands/feet ??

I am in a wonderful position, I can ponder and comment without having to deliver results.

MarkW

_________________
Mark Walker - Oxfordshire, England. Registered Pharmacist (UK). 10 years of study around MS.
Mark's CCSVI Report 7-Mar-11:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/8359854/MS-experts-in-Britain-have-to-open-their-minds.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2011 4:08 am 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 209
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Mark,

Trial design is very complicated. Its even more complicated when you don't understand what you are dealing with, how to diagnose it, how to best treat it.

I am not sure I agree with your comments on the ethics of the sham procedure (however I am not an ethics expert). Without a sham arm, it will be hard to convince anyone that the procedure works.

As we see payment for the procedure dry up in the US, it will be easier to have patients in a trial as they will not have options unless they can afford to pay. That being said, it will also mean that the trials will have to find big $ to pay for them rather then the off budget research that is going on now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Trial Design
PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2011 12:15 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 3:00 pm
Posts: 1064
Location: Oxfordshire, England
Dr Cumming wrote:
Trial design is very complicated. Its even more complicated when you don't understand what you are dealing with, how to diagnose it, how to best treat it.

I agree. I am not sure that there is sufficient understanding to design a trial. In drugs trials you have ascertained dosage form, dose, dose interval/timing information before you design a trial. Part of me thinks Neuros are tricking IR/VSs into trials before sufficent understanding of CCSVI is gained. Could that be deliberate by Neuros ??

Dr Cumming wrote:
I am not sure I agree with your comments on the ethics of the sham procedure (however I am not an ethics expert). Without a sham arm, it will be hard to convince anyone that the procedure works.

My concern about sham procedures for CCSVI is mostly about the sham arm not being sham (because of the patient is awake). A cross over design may help but short term (3 months) improvements must be measurable (complex in MS).

As I said, I have time to ponder..................

MarkW

_________________
Mark Walker - Oxfordshire, England. Registered Pharmacist (UK). 10 years of study around MS.
Mark's CCSVI Report 7-Mar-11:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/8359854/MS-experts-in-Britain-have-to-open-their-minds.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Trial Design
PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2011 5:39 pm 
Offline
Family Elder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 2601
Location: Kanata, Ontario, Canada
MarkW wrote:
My concern about sham procedures for CCSVI is mostly about the sham arm not being sham (because of the patient is awake). A cross over design may help but short term (3 months) improvements must be measurable (complex in MS).
MarkW


A) people have to learn to stop that habit of using those two initials

B) I agree completely about the measureable, non-placebo-able improvements: temperature, cognition, blood pressure, flow rate, oxygenation, lesion burden, your pick, lots of others...

Do not worry that the tests are more invasive even than the procedure. People want the truth very badly.

Do not worry too much about shams for the same reasons. I think people realize the good they are doing, and that some faceless drug vendor is not the stakeholder here. It's us.

If people had to be offered DMDs alternative to the procedure, in order to be in a trial, you could not treat progressive patients from Canada, who are not prescribed DMDs as a rule. That sounds to me like more of the same Machiavellian manipulation that is making people suffer needlessly already. I hope that is not the case.

_________________
"Try - Just A Little Bit Harder" - Janis Joplin
CCSVI procedure Albany Aug 2010
'MS' is over - if you want it
Patients sans/without patience


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2011 6:10 pm 
Offline
Family Elder

Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm
Posts: 8549
Quote:
A) people have to learn to stop that habit of using those two initials

Made me smile.

If I had no other options, in order to get the procedure, I would have participated in a sham trial. I am glad I had other options.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Related topics
 Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Ontario To Establish Expert Panel for Follow-Up Care

[ Go to pageGo to page: 1, 2 ]

Blaze

20

2833

Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:05 pm

thornyrose76 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. MS expert questions CCSVI...

[ Go to pageGo to page: 1, 2, 3 ]

beyondms

44

5244

Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:49 am

Billmeik View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. new no-findings CCSVI paper

Cece

1

812

Tue Jul 26, 2011 2:47 pm

1eye View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Anywone who considers themselve(s) an expert onf CCSVI Help!

lesfromindy

3

1081

Fri Jan 15, 2010 10:29 am

lesfromindy View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. SIR panel sets CCSVI research agenda

PCakes

7

951

Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:08 pm

cheerleader View the latest post

 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


News News Site map Site map SitemapIndex SitemapIndex RSS Feed RSS Feed Channel list Channel list
Read hundreds of personal Multiple Sclerosis stories on Experience Project. Experience Project is an anonymous community where people connect through their life experiences, made by the same people who built This is MS. With over 30 million personal stories about every possible life experience, you can quickly find people like you!


Interesting: Secret Confessions | Dream Meanings | Ask Questions, Get Answers

Advertise on the premier multiple sclerosis forum