This Article Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mayer, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mayer, M. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Listen to all the voices: an advocate's perspective on early access to investigational therapies

In this issue of the journal, The Society for Clinical Trials, whose members are clinical investigators and regulators in academia, government and industry, has published the rationale for their opposition to US Senate bill S. 1956, the socalled "ACCESS" act, which would allow the marketing of therapies that have undergone only Phase I studies (dose finding and toxicity testing) in humans, to patients with "serious and life-threatening" disease who have exhausted other treatment options. While this bill reflects the views and efforts of some cancer advocates and their supporters, it does not represent the beliefs of the cancer advocacy community overall. The essay that follows is inspired by the need for other voices from the patient and advocacy communities to be heard in this debate.

Clinical Trials, Vol. 3, No. 2, 149-153 (2006)
DOI: 10.1191/1740774506cn144oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. D. Jacobson and W. E. Parmet A New Era of Unapproved Drugs: The Case of Abigail Alliance v Von Eschenbach JAMA, January 10, 2007; 297(2): 205 - 208. [Full Text] [PDF]