Regulatory and ethical considerations for linking clinical and administrative databases.

Clinical data registries are valuable tools that support evidence development, performance assessment, comparative effectiveness studies, and the adoption of new treatments into routine clinical practice. Although these registries do not have important information on long-term therapies or clinical events, administrative claims databases offer a potentially valuable complement. This article focuses on the regulatory and ethical considerations that arise from the use of registry data for research, including linkage of clinical and administrative data sets. (1) Are such activities primarily designed for quality assessment and improvement, research, or both, as this determines the appropriate ethical and regulatory standards? (2) Does the submission of data to a central registry, which may subsequently be linked to other data sources, require review by the institutional review board (IRB) of each participating organization? (3) What levels and mechanisms of IRB oversight are appropriate for the existence of a linked central data repository and the specific studies that may subsequently be developed using it? (4) Under what circumstances are waivers of informed consent and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act authorization required? (5) What are the requirements for a limited data set that would qualify a research activity as not involving human subjects and thus not subject to further IRB review? The approaches outlined in this article represent a local interpretation of the regulations in the context of several clinical data registry projects and focuses on a specific case study of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database.

Ethical and regulatory challenges associated with the exception from informed consent requirements for emergency research: from experimental design to institutional review board approval.

Clinical research studies conducted in emergency settings under the waiver of consent provision outlined in federal regulations are uncommon, yet the importance of such research that may result in potentially lifesaving interventions is indisputable. Surgeons, as well as health care professionals in other disciplines of medicine, should be aware of the multiple challenges facing them if they contemplate conducting a research trial without the prospective informed consent of enrolled subjects. The challenges associated with conducting research studies using the exception from informed consent requirements for emergency research are numerous, beginning with ensuring an appropriate study design, understanding state and federal regulations that govern such emergency research studies, and continuing through a complicated and sometimes arduous institutional review board (IRB) process that is unique to these studies. This article will describe the challenges encountered when implementing the exception from informed consent requirements for emergency research and will provide surgeon researchers with an understanding of the ethical controversies surrounding such studies.

POG 8625: a randomized trial comparing chemotherapy with chemoradiotherapy for children and adolescents with Stages I, IIA, IIIA1 Hodgkin Disease: a report from the Children's Oncology Group.

To determine if 6 courses of chemotherapy alone could achieve the same or better outcome than 4 courses of chemotherapy followed by radiation therapy (chemoradiotherapy) in pediatric and adolescent patients with Hodgkin disease. Children < or =21 years old with biopsy-proven, pathologically staged I, IIA, or IIIA1 Hodgkin disease were randomly assigned 6 courses of alternating nitrogen mustard, oncovin, prednisone, and procarbazine/doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (treatment 1) or 4 courses of alternating nitrogen mustard, oncovin, prednisone, and procarbazine/doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine +2550 cGy involved-field radiotherapy (treatment 2). The complete response rate was 89%, with a complete response and partial response rate of 99.4%. There was no statistically significant difference in event-free survival (EFS) or overall survival between arms. The EFS for those who achieved an early complete response was significantly higher than for those who did not. For pediatric patients with asymptomatic low-stage and intermediate-stage Hodgkin disease, chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy both resulted in 3-year EFS of approximately 90% and statistically indistinguishable 8-year EFS and overall survival, without significant long-term toxicity. Early response to therapy was associated with higher EFS, a concept that has led to the Children's Oncology Group paradigm of response-based risk-adapted therapy for pediatric Hodgkin disease.