Most unapproved experimental drugs availed and sold to the public offer negligible or no evidence-based therapeutic efficacy and safety to patients. This leads to losses since individuals purchase drugs that do not benefit them. Unapproved experimental drugs can also lead to high healthcare costs from treating adverse effects from the drugs. This is because they have an inherent safety risk that may potentially cause more harm to the patient or even death since they have not undergone rigorous testing (Mahant, 2020). Nevertheless, making experimental drugs available has the benefit of providing treatment for conditions with limited or no approved medications (Van Norman, 2018). When an experimental drug produces desirable outcomes it guides prescribers in making treatment decisions for patients who present with similar diseases in the future.
I support prescribing pre-approved drugs to wider pools of patients since it increases treatment options for various diseases mostly with limited options. It avails treatment to patients with serious or life-threatening diseases, and those with no comparable therapy or satisfactory alternative therapy. The pre-approved drugs have the potential to improve the quality of life of patients with extremely debilitating and painful conditions (Mahant, 2020). This upholds the ethical principle of beneficence since the prescriber seeks to provide benefit to patients. However, I advocate that autonomy be promoted when prescribing experimental drugs by giving the patient the right to choose their treatment and the ability to act on that choice. Teleology can be applied to judge the prescription of experimental drugs as good or bad by looking at the outcome of the drug’s action.
Ethical theories relevant to experimental drugs are teleology and deontology, while moral principles include beneficence and nonmaleficence. Informed consent entails providing the patient with adequate information about the drug to allow them to make an informed decision about proceeding with treatment. Experimental drugs can increase costs if they are ineffective and contribute to adverse effects but can also promote desirable outcomes.
Mahant, V. (2020). “Right-to-Try” experimental drugs: an overview. Journal of Translational Medicine, 18(1), 253. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-020-02427-4
Munson, R. (2014). Intervention and reflection: Basic issues in bioethics (concise ed.). Wadsworth.
Pietrzykowski, T., & Smilowska, K. (2021). The reality of informed consent: empirical studies on patient comprehension—a systematic review. Trials, 22, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04969-w
Van Norman, G. A. (2018). Expanding Patient Access to Investigational Drugs: Single Patient Investigational New Drug and the “Right to Try”. JACC. Basic to translational science, 3(2), 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacbts.2017.11.007