Dataset Information

Phase I trial compensation: How much do healthy volunteers actually earn from clinical trial enrollment?

ABSTRACT:

Background/aims

Financial compensation for research participation is a major focus of ethical concern regarding human subject recruitment. Phase I trials are sometimes considered to be a lucrative source of income for healthy volunteers, encouraging some people to become "professional guinea pigs." Yet, little is known about how much these clinical trials actually pay and how much healthy volunteers earn from them.

Methods

As part of a mixed-methods, longitudinal study of healthy volunteers, we required participants to complete clinical trial diaries, or surveys that captured detailed information about screening and enrollment in Phase I trials. Over a 3-year period, participants provided information online or via telephone about each clinical trial for which they screened (e.g. the clinic name, the study's therapeutic area, the length of the trial, the number of nights spent in the clinic, and the study compensation), and whether they qualified for trial inclusion. Clinical trial diaries generated data about whether participants continued to screen for and enroll in clinical trials and how much money they earned from their participation.

Results

131 participants routinely completed clinical trial diaries or confirmed that they had not screened for any new clinical trials. Together, these participants screened for 1001 clinical trials at 73 research facilities during a 3-year period. Overall, the median clinical trial compensation was US$3070 (range = US$150-US$13,000). Participants seeking new healthy volunteer trials tended to screen for three studies per year, participate in one or two studies, and earn roughly US$4000 annually. Participants who were unemployed earned the most income from clinical trials compared to those with full-time or part-time jobs, and those individuals whom we label "occupational" participants because of their persistent pursuit of clinical trials earned more than people who screened occasionally. Notably, the median annual trial compensation was well below US$10,000 for all employment groups, and most occupational healthy volunteers also earned less than US$10,000 each year. The 10% of participants who earned the most had a median annual income of US$18,885 from clinical trials, and there was significant volatility in these individuals' earnings from year to year.

Conclusion

Despite the perception that Phase I enrollment can generate significant earnings, it was exceedingly rare for anyone in this study to make more than US$20,000 in a single year, and unusual to earn even between US$10,000 and US$20,000. From an ethics perspective, individual trials might appear to unduly induce enrollment by offering significant sums of money, but given our findings, the larger problem for low-income participants may be the unrealistic perception that clinical trials alone could be a way of earning a living.

SUBMITTER: Fisher JA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8290991 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Existing treatments are inadequate for patients at high risk of coronary heart disease caused by elevated levels of plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). Bambuterol is a prodrug of ?2-agonist commonly used for the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with the advantage of once daily dosing and favorable side effect profile. The potential lipid-lowering effects of bambuterol were unclear, possibly due to the racemic bambuterol (rac-bambuterol) that was used in previous studies.The lipid-lowering effects of R-bambuterol were examined in a randomized phase I trial in 48 healthy Chinese volunteers aged 18-45 years. Participants were randomly assigned to five groups to receive a single dose (2.5 mg, 5 mg or 10 mg) or multiple doses (5 mg) of oral medications of R-bambuterol, or a single dose of rac-bambuterol (10 mg). Plasma lipid levels were measured at baseline, time to peak concentration (Tmax) and 24 h after the treatment.Administration of a single-dose of R-bambuterol resulted in dose-dependent reductions in the levels of plasma LDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), apolipoprotein B (ApoB) and apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1) at Tmax. Levels of LDL-C exhibited the most reductions, which were statistically significant in all three single-dose R-bambuterol groups (all P values < 0.05). R-bambuterol was more potent in LDL-C lowering compared to rac-bambuterol at Tmax (P = 0.08). At 24 h after dosing, the significant lipid lowering effects of R-bambuterol sustained for LDL-C (P = 0.01), ApoB (P = 0.001) and ApoA1 (P = 0.03), but not for HDL-C. The ratio of ApoA1/ApoB was marginally increased (P = 0.06). In the multiple-dose group, LDL-C levels again were significantly reduced (all P values < 0.05), whereas the ratios of ApoA1/ApoB were marginally increased.R-bambuterol can lower the plasma levels of LDL-C, and marginally raise the ratio of ApoA1/ApoB (indicator of HDL-C/LDL-C) with both a single dose and multiple doses. R-bambuterol was more potent in LDL-C lowering than rac-bambuterol.

Project description:BackgroundThere is limited research on healthy volunteers' perceptions of the risks of Phase I clinical trials. In order to contribute empirically to long-standing ethical concerns about healthy volunteers' involvement in drug development, it is crucial to assess how these participants understand trial risks. The objectives of this study were to investigate (1) participants' views of the overall risks of Phase I trials, (2) their views of the risk of personally being harmed in a trial, and (3) how risk perceptions vary across participants' clinical trial history and sociodemographic characteristics.Methods and findingsWe qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed semi-structured interviews conducted with 178 healthy volunteers who had participated in a diverse range of Phase I trials in the United States. Participants had collective experience in a reported 1,948 Phase I trials (mean = 10.9; median = 5), and they were interviewed as part of a longitudinal study of healthy volunteers' risk perceptions, their trial enrollment decisions, and their routine health behaviors. Participants' qualitative responses were coded, analyzed, and subsequently quantified in order to assess correlations between their risk perceptions and demographics, such as their race/ethnicity, gender, age, educational attainment, employment status, and household income. We found that healthy volunteers often viewed the overall risks of Phase I trials differently than their own personal risk of harm. The majority of our participants thought that Phase I trials were medium, high, or extremely high risk (118 of 178), but most nonetheless felt that they were personally safe from harm (97 of 178). We also found that healthy volunteers in their first year of clinical trial participation, racial and ethnic minority participants, and Hispanic participants tended to view the overall trial risks as high (respectively, Jonckheere-Terpstra, -2.433, p = 0.015; Fisher exact test, p = 0.016; Fisher exact test, p = 0.008), but these groups did not differ in regard to their perceptions of personal risk of harm (respectively, chi-squared, 3.578, p = 0.059; chi-squared, 0.845, p = 0.358; chi-squared, 1.667, p = 0.197). The main limitation of our study comes from quantitatively aggregating data from in-depth interviews, which required the research team to interpret participants' nonstandardized risk narratives.ConclusionsOur study demonstrates that healthy volunteers are generally aware of and reflective about Phase I trial risks. The discrepancy in healthy volunteers' views of overall and personal risk sheds light on why healthy volunteers might continue to enroll in clinical trials, even when they view trials on the whole as risky.