Ethical Considerations in Chemotherapy and Vaccines in Cancer Patients in Times of the COVID-19 Pandemic
Open Access
- 26 May 2021
- journal article
- editorial
- Published by MDPI AG in Current Oncology
- Vol. 28 (3), 2007-2013
- https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28030186
Abstract
The COVID-19 situation is a worldwide health emergency with strong implications in clinical oncology. In this viewpoint, we address two crucial dilemmas from the ethical dimension: (1) Is it ethical to postpone or suspend cancer treatments which offer a statistically significant benefit in quality of life and survival in cancer patients during this time of pandemic?; (2) Should we vaccinate cancer patients against COVID-19 if scientific studies have not included this subgroup of patients? Regarding the first question, the best available evidence applied to the ethical principles of Beauchamp and Childress shows that treatments (such as chemotherapy) with clinical benefit are fair and beneficial. Indeed, the suspension or delay of such treatments should be considered malefic. Regarding the second question, applying the doctrine of double-effect, we show that the potential beneficial effect of vaccines in the population with cancer (or those one that has had cancer) is much higher than the potential adverse effects of these vaccines. In addition, there is no better and less harmful known solution.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Chemotherapy and COVID-19 Outcomes in Patients With CancerJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2020
- Mortality in patients with cancer and coronavirus disease 2019: A systematic review and pooled analysis of 52 studiesEuropean Journal of Cancer, 2020
- COVID-19 mortality in patients with cancer on chemotherapy or other anticancer treatments: a prospective cohort studyThe Lancet, 2020
- Safety of Inactivated Influenza Vaccine in Cancer Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint InhibitorsClinical Infectious Diseases, 2019
- Unraveling R0: Considerations for Public Health ApplicationsAmerican Journal of Public Health, 2014
- INTENTIONS, MOTIVES AND THE DOCTRINE OF DOUBLE EFFECTThe Philosophical Quarterly, 2009
- The principle and problem of proximity in ethicsJournal of Medical Ethics, 2008
- Immune dysfunction in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM)FEMS Immunology & Medical Microbiology, 1999
- Actions, intentions, and consequences: The Doctrine of Double EffectPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,1994
- Reply to Boyle's Who is Entitled to Double-Effect?Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 1991