The Neiswanger Institute for Bioethics at Loyola University

Setback for terminally ill patients seeking experimental drugs

By Alicia Ouellette

The Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs suffered a major (and perhaps fatal) setback in its battle to establish for terminally ill patients a constitutional right of access to experimental drugs. In an 8-2 ruling, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia reversed a May 2006 ruling by a divided three-judge appeals panel, which recognized such a right (pdf of the decision).

After describing in some detail the FDA process for approval of new drugs, including FDA programs designed to provide early access to promising experimental drugs, the Court rejected the argument that "where there are no alternative government-approved treatment options, a terminally ill, mentally competent adult patient's informed access to potentially life-saving investigational new drugs determined by the FDA after Phase I trials to be sufficiently safe for expanded human trials warrants protection under the Due Process Clause."

Writing for the majority, Judge Thomas Griffith stated that "the Alliance's argument ignores our Nation's history of drug safety regulation. . .. [T]he Alliance [cannot] override current FDA regulations simply by insisting that drugs which have completed Phase It esting are safe enough for terminally ill patients. Current law bars public access to drugs undergoing clinical testing on safety grounds. The fact that a drug has emerged from Phase I with a determination that it is safe for limited clinical testing in a controlled and closely-monitored environment after detailed scrutiny of each trial participant does not mean that a drug is safe for use beyond supervised trials. FDA regulation of post- Phase I drugs is entirely consistent with our historical tradition of prohibiting the sale of unsafe drugs."

The Abigail Alliance is sure to seek review by the Supreme Court.

Alicia Ouellette directs the program on Health Law and Bioethics at Albany Law School and the Alden March Bioethics Institute.

comments

There have been many lawsuits with results suggesting we do not permit the sale of unsafe drugs.
Onehealthpro

contribute a comment

Your contributions to the conversation are very much appreciated. We do have a few simple guidelines, though. Be civil. Stay on topic. We reserve the right to remove comments that violate the aforementioned guidelines. One more thing: comments are moderated, so it may take a little while for your comment to be posted. Thanks.

what is this?

A 'Nature Top 50' science blog by the editors, staff and friends of The American Journal of Bioethics. Science writes: "To follow the latest twists in ... science stories with social impact, dive into this Web log"

The original story behind this blog

What people are saying about blog.bioethics.net

recently on blog.bioethics.net

The 5 most popular Bioethics News stories from the week of June 9

Here are the most popular Bioethics News items from last week based on average clicks per day: 1. Japan looks to drop a few pounds... (more)

The 5 most popular Bioethics News stories from the week of June 1

Here are the most popular Bioethics News items from last week based on average clicks per day: 1. Race and place (NYT) A study by... (more)

The 5 most popular Bioethics News stories from the week of May 26

Here are the most popular Bioethics News items from last week based on average clicks per day: 1. It matters where you grow up (USA... (more)

Francis Collins: A view from the press room

By Ricki Lewis Francis Collins, the soon-to-be former director of the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), boldly ventured where not too many scientists dare... (more)

Unintended consequences from GINA?

Many have hailed the passage of the Genetic Information Nondescrimination Act as a major policy advance. And while there are certainly people who will benefit... (more)

this blog's feed

info

archives

tags