Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > A Leap of Faith? Sanctioning Xenotransplant Cli...
View graph of relations

A Leap of Faith? Sanctioning Xenotransplant Clinical Trials.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

A Leap of Faith? Sanctioning Xenotransplant Clinical Trials. / Fovargue, Sara J.
In: Liverpool Law Review, Vol. 26, No. 2, 01.2005, p. 125-147.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Fovargue SJ. A Leap of Faith? Sanctioning Xenotransplant Clinical Trials. Liverpool Law Review. 2005 Jan;26(2):125-147. doi: 10.1007/s10991-005-4840-9

Author

Fovargue, Sara J. / A Leap of Faith? Sanctioning Xenotransplant Clinical Trials. In: Liverpool Law Review. 2005 ; Vol. 26, No. 2. pp. 125-147.

Bibtex

@article{f32cd29c4d4c4806858ecdc825847cd3,
title = "A Leap of Faith? Sanctioning Xenotransplant Clinical Trials.",
abstract = "Introducing a new medical technique, procedure or drug to the public via clinical trials is risky at the best of times. When the trial involves a biotechnology which holds out the promise of prolonging, if not saving, life the push to move from the laboratory to clinical trials may be hard to resist. In this article I explore whether the regulatory scheme for clinical trials in the UK is able to accommodate developing technologies by considering how the current legal and ethical frameworks determine when a procedure such as xenotransplantation should proceed to trials. In particular, I discuss whether basing our regulatory schemes on the principles espoused in the Declaration of Helsinki offer sufficient protection to those who may be affected by xenotransplant trials – the recipient, their health-care workers, close contacts and, unusually, the wider public. I question whether it is possible for a technology to be approved for clinical trials when allowing such trials may benefit the individual but ultimately negatively impact on society as a whole.",
keywords = "clinical trials - organs - regulation - risk - therapeutic benefit - xenotransplantation",
author = "Fovargue, {Sara J.}",
year = "2005",
month = jan,
doi = "10.1007/s10991-005-4840-9",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "125--147",
journal = "Liverpool Law Review",
issn = "1572-8625",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Leap of Faith? Sanctioning Xenotransplant Clinical Trials.

AU - Fovargue, Sara J.

PY - 2005/1

Y1 - 2005/1

N2 - Introducing a new medical technique, procedure or drug to the public via clinical trials is risky at the best of times. When the trial involves a biotechnology which holds out the promise of prolonging, if not saving, life the push to move from the laboratory to clinical trials may be hard to resist. In this article I explore whether the regulatory scheme for clinical trials in the UK is able to accommodate developing technologies by considering how the current legal and ethical frameworks determine when a procedure such as xenotransplantation should proceed to trials. In particular, I discuss whether basing our regulatory schemes on the principles espoused in the Declaration of Helsinki offer sufficient protection to those who may be affected by xenotransplant trials – the recipient, their health-care workers, close contacts and, unusually, the wider public. I question whether it is possible for a technology to be approved for clinical trials when allowing such trials may benefit the individual but ultimately negatively impact on society as a whole.

AB - Introducing a new medical technique, procedure or drug to the public via clinical trials is risky at the best of times. When the trial involves a biotechnology which holds out the promise of prolonging, if not saving, life the push to move from the laboratory to clinical trials may be hard to resist. In this article I explore whether the regulatory scheme for clinical trials in the UK is able to accommodate developing technologies by considering how the current legal and ethical frameworks determine when a procedure such as xenotransplantation should proceed to trials. In particular, I discuss whether basing our regulatory schemes on the principles espoused in the Declaration of Helsinki offer sufficient protection to those who may be affected by xenotransplant trials – the recipient, their health-care workers, close contacts and, unusually, the wider public. I question whether it is possible for a technology to be approved for clinical trials when allowing such trials may benefit the individual but ultimately negatively impact on society as a whole.

KW - clinical trials - organs - regulation - risk - therapeutic benefit - xenotransplantation

U2 - 10.1007/s10991-005-4840-9

DO - 10.1007/s10991-005-4840-9

M3 - Journal article

VL - 26

SP - 125

EP - 147

JO - Liverpool Law Review

JF - Liverpool Law Review

SN - 1572-8625

IS - 2

ER -