It is currently 19 Apr 2019, 06:54
My Tests

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

The efficacy of standard clinical trials in medicine has rec

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Founder
Founder
User avatar
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 6185
Followers: 99

Kudos [?]: 1199 [0], given: 5699

CAT Tests
The efficacy of standard clinical trials in medicine has rec [#permalink] New post 09 Dec 2018, 06:27
Expert's post
00:00

Question Stats:

30% (09:27) correct 70% (07:41) wrong based on 10 sessions
The efficacy of standard clinical trials in medicine has recently become the subject of contentious debate between those practitioners who maintain that such trials, despite admitted shortcomings, still represent the best means we have for learning about the effects of pharmaceutical drugs on the human body, and those who maintain that the current system of collecting knowledge of such effects is but one possibility and most likely not the most efficacious one.

Gimley and Lebsmith, in their recent work, fall into the latter camp and indeed go further by challenging the idea that the standard medical trials can yield meaningful information on pharmacogenetics, or how a drug interacts with the human body. Gimley and Lebsmith’s foremost criticism is that the effect of a drug differs depending on a person’s physiology. To be sure, there are cohorts, or groups, that react to a drug in a specific manner, but clinical trials are unequipped to identify such groupings. The main reason is that clinical trials are allied to the notion that the larger the number of subjects in a study, the greater the validity of a drug, should it show any promise.

Therefore, even if a drug can exercise a marked effect on a subset of subjects within a trial, this information will be lost in the statistical noise. Another criticism of Gimley and Lebsmith concerns the very idea of validity. Pharmaceutical companies will run hundreds of trials on hundreds of different medications. Given the sheer number of trials, a few are likely to yield positive results, even if there is no demonstrable effect. Gimley and Lebsmith cite the fact that most pharmaceuticals that have exerted a positive effect in the first round of testing are likely to fail in the second round of testing.

Gimley and Lebsmith argue that a more effective approach is to identify groups who exhibit similar genetic subtypes. This very approach is currently in use in groups possessing a particular molecular subtype of breast cancer. Furthermore, these groups are not only trying one specific drug, but also a combination of such drugs, subbing them in and out to measure the effects on a subject, a procedure Gimley and Lebsmith endorse. Nonetheless, such an approach is often both time-consuming and costly. However, given the constraints of current medical trials, trials that target subtypes— even if they do not yield any significant advances— will encourage a culture of experimentation on how clinical trials are conducted in the first place.
What is the primary purpose of this passage?

A. To evaluate and survey diverse opinions on the current state of a field
B. To point out an oversight in the work of two scholars
C. To discuss a field of inquiry and several ways in which that field can be improved
D. To describe a current debate and the analysis of specific researchers
E. To assess the effect the work of two scholars has had in their field

[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
D



Which of the hypothetical trials best parallels a shortcoming in clinical trials as described by Gimley and Lebsmith?

A. A subset of patients displays a slightly negative reaction to a drug, but that outcome is masked by the majority of subjects’ responses, which are neither positive nor negative.
B. A drug exercises a strong negative effect on a subgroup but this effect is masked by the majority of subjects’ responses, which are neither positive nor negative.
C. The majority of patients in a trial exhibit a negative effect to a drug, yet the fact that a few subjects exhibited a positive effect diminishes the intensity of the negative effect.
D. A trial targeting a particular genetic subtype struggles to recruit enough subjects to establish that an observed effect of a drug would be valid across a larger population.
E. Several subjects in a trial exhibited positive effects from a drug used during an initial phase of an experiment, but once another drug was substituted for the drug used in the initial phase, those patients failed to exhibit any positive effects.

[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
B


It can be most reasonably inferred that those on the side of the debate endorsing standard medical trials are likely to believe which of the following?

A. Those favoring standard clinical trials believe that such trials represent the only means scientists have of studying pharmacogenetics.
B. The experimental methods espoused by Gimley and Lebsmith may ultimately come to displace those currently in use.
C. The most effective method of gathering information concerning pharmacogenetics will not be without flaws.
D. Clinical trials that focus on a specific genetic subtype will be better able to isolate the effects of a specific drug.
E. Many drugs exhibiting a positive effect on subjects in the first round of testing will fail to exhibit the same positive effect in subsequent tests.

[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
C


_________________

Get the 2 FREE GREPrepclub Tests

Director
Director
Joined: 09 Nov 2018
Posts: 509
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 1

Re: The efficacy of standard clinical trials in medicine has rec [#permalink] New post 19 Jan 2019, 19:48
Any explanation please?
Intern
Intern
Joined: 31 Jan 2019
Posts: 8
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 1

Re: The efficacy of standard clinical trials in medicine has rec [#permalink] New post 06 Feb 2019, 03:30
how can b be the answer for q2
Founder
Founder
User avatar
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 6185
Followers: 99

Kudos [?]: 1199 [0], given: 5699

CAT Tests
Re: The efficacy of standard clinical trials in medicine has rec [#permalink] New post 06 Feb 2019, 12:41
Expert's post
Quote:
Therefore, even if a drug can exercise a marked effect on a subset of subjects within a trial, this information will be lost in the statistical noise. Another criticism of Gimley and Lebsmith concerns the very idea of validity. Pharmaceutical companies will run hundreds of trials on hundreds of different medications. Given the sheer number of trials, a few are likely to yield positive results, even if there is no demonstrable effect. Gimley and Lebsmith cite the fact that most pharmaceuticals that have exerted a positive effect in the first round of testing are likely to fail in the second round of testing.


from this only B resembles in a suitable way.

Hope now is more clear to you.

Regards
_________________

Get the 2 FREE GREPrepclub Tests

Re: The efficacy of standard clinical trials in medicine has rec   [#permalink] 06 Feb 2019, 12:41
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The efficacy of standard clinical trials in medicine has rec

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

GRE Prep Club Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GRE Prep Club Rules| Contact

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group

Kindly note that the GRE® test is a registered trademark of the Educational Testing Service®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by ETS®.