You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 124 No. 7, July 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Controversies
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (4)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related letters
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Neurology
 •Neuro-ophthalmology
 •Ophthalmological Disorders, Other
 •Randomized Controlled Trial
 •Drug Therapy
 •Drug Therapy, Other
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Using a Drug Before the Risks and Benefits Are Known From a Phase 3 Clinical Trial

Thoughts on Compassion

Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124:1029-1031.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Compassion: the feeling or emotion, when a person is moved by the suffering or distress of another, and by the desire to relieve it; pity that inclines one to spare or to succour.1

Compassion is an essential component of the moral compass that informs our behavior as physicians. It is at the basis of the principle that the needs of the patient are paramount. However, there are instances in which ethical, legal, or logistical considerations may constrain physicians from acting with what they interpret as compassion. This article explores one such dilemma that sooner or later is apt to confront the clinician.

Most available drugs have been approved by phase 3 trials for some specific indication or indications. Because the risks and benefits have been identified through appropriate testing in human subjects, there is no hesitancy to use them for the appropriate indications. However, there are instances in which we . . . [Full Text of this Article]


AUTHOR INFORMATION
Joan W. Miller, MD
Author Affiliations: Department of Ophthalmology, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Harvard Medical School, Boston.



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

RELATED LETTERS

An Ethical View of the Ranibizumab and Bevacizumab Controversy
Samuel Packer and Lee M. Jampol
Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(2):286.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

An Ethical View of the Ranibizumab and Bevacizumab Controversy—Reply
Joan W. Miller
Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(2):286-287.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

An Ethical View of the Ranibizumab and Bevacizumab Controversy—Reply
Raja Narayanan and Baruch D. Kuppermann
Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(2):287.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

Uncertain Compassion in Using a Drug Before the Risks and Benefits Are Known
Raja Narayanan and Baruch D. Kuppermann
Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124(7):1032-1034.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

An Ethical View of the Ranibizumab and Bevacizumab Controversy
Packer and Jampol
Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:286-286.
FULL TEXT  

An Ethical View of the Ranibizumab and Bevacizumab Controversy--Reply
Miller
Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126:286-287.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2006 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.