↓ Skip to main content

Compassionate use programs in Italy: ethical guidelines

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Ethics, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Compassionate use programs in Italy: ethical guidelines
Published in
BMC Medical Ethics, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12910-018-0263-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ludovica De Panfilis, Roberto Satolli, Massimo Costantini

Abstract

This article proposes a retrospective analysis of a compassionate use (CU), using a case study of request for Avelumab for a patient suffering from Merkel Cell Carcinoma. The study is the result of a discussion within a Provincial Ethics Committee (EC) following the finding of a high number of requests for CU program. The primary objective of the study is to illustrate the specific ethical and clinical profiles that emerge from the compassionate use program (CUP) issue. The secondary goals are: a) to promote a moral reflection among physicians who require approval for the CUP and b) provide the basis for recommendations on how to request CUP. The instruments for carrying out the analysis of the case study and the discussion are as follows: Analysis of the audio-recording of the EC meeting regarding the selected Case study. In-depth discussion of topics that emerged during the meeting by means of administration of 5 semi-structured interviews with 2 doctors involved in the case (proposing physician and palliative physician) and with 3 components of the EC who played a major role in the EC internal discussion. In an exploration of emerging clinical and ethical issues, four primary themes arise: 1. efficacy, safety of the treatment and patient's quality of life; 2. clear, realistic, adequate communication; 3. right to hope; 4. simultaneous Palliative Care approach. The results of ethical analysis carried out concern two areas: 1) ethical profiles relating to the use of CUP; 2) the role of the EC concerning the compassionate use of drugs and the need to provide recommendations on how to request CUP. With the aim of implementing these conclusions, the provincial EC of Reggio Emilia chose to steer the request for drugs for compassionate use through recommendations for good clinical and ethical practice based on the following assumptions: 1) the "simultaneous care" approach must be preferred. Secondly, 2) the EC's assessment must be part of the decision-making process that the care team conducts before proposing compassionate use to the patient.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 21%
Student > Bachelor 13 14%
Researcher 5 5%
Other 4 4%
Professor 4 4%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 37 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 23 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 44 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 March 2019.
All research outputs
#6,279,678
of 23,026,672 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#541
of 995 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,406
of 332,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#20
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,026,672 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 995 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,332 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.