BACKGROUND: Most children with cancer enroll in clinical research trials. Whenever possible, children must provide their assent before enrolling in research studies. We studied what children aged 7 to 18 with cancer understand about research, their research-related treatment, and their preferences for inclusion in decision-making. PROCEDURE: Thirty-seven face-to-face, audiorecorded interviews using a novel, semi-structured tool, the quality-of-assent instrument, were conducted. Exploratory univariate and bivariate analyses of the quantitative data elucidated patterns and trends of understanding and preferences. RESULTS: Nineteen of the 37 children (51%) did not know or recall that their treatment was considered research, and 19 of 22 (86%) did not understand their doctor when he or she discussed the trial. More children enrolled in trials to help future children with cancer (27 of 37 [73%]), than to get better personally (22 of 37 [60%]). Irrespective of age, children with Hodgkin's disease, germ-cell tumors, and leukemia had significantly greater research awareness and appreciation than children with other cancers (P = .019 and P < .001, respectively). Although all children wanted to be involved in decision-making, 18 of 37 (49%) did not have or recall having a role in deciding to enroll in their trial, and 14 of 37 (38%) did not feel free to dissent to trial enrollment. Only 4 of 37 children (11%) discussed increased decision-making roles with parents, and only 7 of 37 (19%) discussed them with their doctors. CONCLUSIONS: Most children have limited understanding of research despite physicians' explanations. Many children reported that they feel minimally involved in the decision to enroll in clinical trials. Tools to assist investigators ascertain that children understand what they are agreeing to when they assent to research and to determine their preferences for inclusion in research may help make assent more meaningful.

IMPORTANCE-Navigating requests from parents or family caregivers not to disclose poor prognosis to seriously ill children can be challenging, especially when the requests seem culturally mediated. Pediatric clinicians must balance obligations to respect individual patient autonomy, professional truth telling, and tolerance of multicultural values.OBSERVATIONS-To provide suggestions for respectful and ethically appropriate responses to nondisclosure requests, we used a hypothetical case example of a Middle Eastern adolescent patient with incurable cancer and conducted an ethical analysis incorporating (1) evidence from both Western and Middle Eastern medical literature and (2) theories of cultural relativism and justice. While Western medical literature tends to prioritize patient autonomy and corresponding truth telling, the weight of evidence from the Middle East suggests high variability between and within individual countries, patient-physician relationships, and families regarding truth-telling practices and preferences. A common reason for nondisclosure in both populations is protecting

Shortages of essential drugs, including critical chemotherapy drugs, have become commonplace. Drug shortages cost significant time and financial resources, lead to adverse patient outcomes, delay clinical trials, and pose significant ethical challenges. Pediatric oncology is particularly susceptible to drug shortages, presenting an opportunity to examine these ethical issues and provide recommendations for preventing and alleviating shortages. We convened the Working Group on Chemotherapy Drug Shortages in Pediatric Oncology (WG) and developed consensus on the core ethical values and practical actions necessary for a coordinated response to the problem of shortages by institutions, agencies, and other stakeholders. The interdisciplinary and multiinstitutional WG included practicing pediatric hematologist-oncologists, nurses, hospital pharmacists, bioethicists, experts in emergency management and public policy, legal scholars, patient/family advocates, and leaders of relevant professional societies and organizations. The WG endorsed 2 core ethical values: maximizing the potential benefits of effective drugs and ensuring equitable access. From these, we developed 6 recommendations: (1) supporting national polices to prevent shortages, (2) optimizing use of drug supplies, (3) giving equal priority to evidence-based uses of drugs whether they occur within or outside clinical trials, (4) developing an improved clearinghouse for sharing drug shortage information, (5) exploring the sharing of drug supplies among institutions, and (6) developing proactive stakeholder engagement strategies to facilitate prevention and management of shortages. Each recommendation includes an ethical rationale, action items, and barriers that must be overcome. Implemented together, they provide a blueprint for effective and ethical management of drug shortages in pediatric oncology and beyond.