What do we really know about conflicts of interest in biomedical research?

Financial conflicts of interest in systematic reviews: associations with results, conclusions, and methodological quality

BACKGROUND

Financial conflicts of interest in systematic reviews (e.g. funding by drug or device companies or authors' collaboration with such companies) may impact on how the reviews are conducted and reported.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the degree to which financial conflicts of interest related to drug and device companies are associated with results, conclusions, and methodological quality of systematic reviews.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Methodology Register for studies published up to November 2016. We also read reference lists of included studies, searched grey literature sources, and Web of Science for studies citing the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies were studies that compared systematic reviews with and without financial conflicts of interest in order to investigate differences in results (estimated treatment effect and frequency of statistically favourable results), frequency of favourable conclusions, or measures of methodological quality of the review (e.g. as evaluated on the Oxman and Guyatt index).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently determined the eligibility of studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We synthesised the results of each study relevant to each of our outcomes. For meta-analyses, we used Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models to estimate risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), with RR > 1 indicating that systematic reviews with financial conflicts of interest more frequently had statistically favourable results or favourable conclusions, and had lower methodological quality. When a quantitative synthesis was considered not meaningful, results from individual studies were summarised qualitatively.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies with a total of 995 systematic reviews of drug studies and 15 systematic reviews of device studies were included. We assessed two studies as low risk of bias and eight as high risk, primarily because of risk of confounding. The estimated treatment effect was not statistically significantly different for systematic reviews with and without financial conflicts of interest (Z-score: 0.46, P value: 0.64; based on one study of 14 systematic reviews which had a matched design, comparing otherwise similar systematic reviews). We found no statistically significant difference in frequency of statistically favourable results for systematic reviews with and without financial conflicts of interest (RR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.14; based on one study of 124 systematic reviews). An analysis adjusting for confounding due to methodological quality (i.e. score on the Oxman and Guyatt index) provided a similar result. Systematic reviews with financial conflicts of interest more often had favourable conclusions compared with systematic reviews without (RR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.26 to 3.11; based on seven studies of 411 systematic reviews). Similar results were found in two studies with a matched design, which therefore had a reduced risk of confounding. Systematic reviews with financial conflicts of interest tended to have lower methodological quality compared with systematic reviews without financial conflicts of interest (RR for 11 dimensions of methodological quality spanned from 1.00 to 1.83). Similar results were found in analyses based on two studies with matched designs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Systematic reviews with financial conflicts of interest more often have favourable conclusions and tend to have lower methodological quality than systematic reviews without financial conflicts of interest. However, it is uncertain whether financial conflicts of interest are associated with the results of systematic reviews. We suggest that patients, clinicians, developers of clinical guidelines, and planners of further research could primarily use systematic reviews without financial conflicts of interest. If only systematic reviews with financial conflicts of interest are available, we suggest that users read the review conclusions with skepticism, critically appraise the methods applied, and interpret the review results with caution.

Políticas de promoção da saúde e potenciais conflitos de interesses que envolvem o setor privado comercial

Resumo O estudo analisou os potenciais conflitos de interesses (CDI) que envolvem o setor privado comercial no âmbito das políticas de promoção da saúde (PS), especialmente em sua interface com o campo da alimentação e nutrição no Brasil. Consideraram-se as influências do ideário internacional nesse processo e, para tal, foram analisadas as duas edições da Política Nacional de Promoção da Saúde (2006 e 2014) e os pactos internacionais que as subsidiaram. O estudo pautou-se em método de análise documental, considerando as seguintes dimensões e categorias de análise: na dimensão do ideário da PS foram identificados os enfoques, os princípios e as estratégias propostos; na dimensão dos CDI foram identificadas a abordagem do tema nos documentos, as relações com o setor privado comercial, e as propostas denominadas “parcerias público-privado”. Concluiu-se que a abordagem de CDI ainda é frágil nessas políticas. O debate é despolitizado quando não são explicitadas as assimetrias de poder entre os setores envolvidos nas relações público-privado, ou quando são desconsideradas as práticas do setor privado comercial que ferem objetivos, princípios e valores das políticas de PS.

The genesis and correction of unprofessional behavior in surgeons: The role of society, education and genetics

BACKGROUND

Most surgeons are ethical. Increasingly, however, a variety of unprofessional behaviors are surfacing. Awareness of these behaviors and their causation is required to plan their eradication.

OBJECTIVES

To (i) identify the prevalent causes of unprofessional behaviors amongst surgeons; and (ii) suggest corrective interventions.

METHODS

Literature was searched and models constructed to interpret interrelationships between causes.

FINDINGS

Unprofessional behaviors extend beyond those frequently discussed, necessitating the term 'dysprofessionalism'. Causal influences arise from (i) an overpowering society; (ii) limited education and (iii) the underdeveloped state of human nature at birth. Societies corrupt by role-modeling avarice and encouraging industry-despite consequent pollution. Society brooks no interference. Surgeons are loath to oppose, resulting in an unprofessional silence. Surgical education based on best evidence is an indoctrination, with little opportunity to deploy alternatives. Evidence based guidelines increasingly risk errors, as publication fraud increases. Effective interaction with government/legislation is not taught. Human nature and our brain remain arrested in a stage of strongly stabilized evolutionary selection. Humans are born with larval brains requiring intense educational interventions. Genetic modification holds promise as it can circumvent birth in undeveloped states, and facilitate trans-generational transfer of knowledge. CRISPR/Cas-9 techniques make this possible, necessitating ethical discussion-an urgent issue. Reforming society would otherwise be an impossible task as behaviors cannot be taught in classrooms.

CONCLUSION

Instances of dysprofessionalism are unlikely to diminish using current approaches. Discussion of the ethics of genetically modifying embryos is urgently needed, as this could provide a possible shortcut to positive changes in human behavior, but risks unwanted changes and misuse.

Analysis of warning letters issued by the US Food and Drug Administration to clinical investigators, institutional review boards and sponsors: a retrospective study

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issues warning letters to all research stakeholders if unacceptable deficiencies are found during site visits. Warning letters issued by the FDA between January 2011 and December 2012 to clinical investigators and institutional review boards (IRBs) were reviewed for various violation themes and compared to similar studies in the past. Warning letters issued to sponsors between January 2005 and December 2012 were analysed for the first time for a specific set of violations using descriptive statistics. Failure to protect subject safety and to report adverse events to IRBs was found to be significant compared to prior studies for clinical investigators, while failure to follow standard operating procedures and maintain documentation was noted as significant in warning letters to IRBs. Failure to maintain minutes of meeting and to follow written procedures for continuing review were new substantial violations in warning letters issued to IRBs. Forty-six warning letters were issued to sponsors, the most common violations being failure to follow a monitoring schedule (58.69%), failure to obtain investigator agreement (34.78%), failure to secure investigators' compliance (30.43%), and failure to maintain data records and ship documents to investigators (30.43%). Appropriate methods for handling clinical trial procedural violations should be developed and implemented worldwide.

Reporting of funding sources and conflict of interest in the supportive and palliative oncology literature

CONTEXT

The reporting of funding support and conflict of interest has not been examined in the supportive/palliative oncology literature.

OBJECTIVES

We examined the frequency of funding and conflict of interest reporting and various study characteristics associated with such reporting.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE PubMed, PsycInfo, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, and CINAHL for original studies related to palliative care and cancer in the first six months of 2004 and 2009. For each article, we reviewed the study design, research topic, journal type, and reporting of funding and conflict of interest.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-four (41%) and 504 (59%) of 848 articles were from 2004 and 2009, respectively. Five hundred two of 848 (59%) studies reported no funding sources, whereas 216 (26%), 70 (8%), 34 (4%), and 26 (3%) reported one, two, three, and four or more sources, respectively. Key funding sources included governmental agencies (n=182/848, 21%), philanthropic foundations (n=163/848, 19%), university departments (n=76/848, 9%), and industry (n=27/848, 3%). Conflict of interest was not reported in 436 of 848 (51%) studies, and only 94 of 848 (11%) explicitly stated no conflict of interest. Other than extramural funding, conflict of interest reporting of any kind was extremely rare (mostly less than 1%). Conflict of interest reporting increased between 2004 and 2009 (39% vs. 55%, P<0.001). Both funding and conflict of interest reporting were associated with prospective studies, larger sample sizes, nontherapeutic studies, North American authors, and publication in palliative care/oncology journals (P≤0.008 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSION

A majority of supportive/palliative oncology studies did not report funding sources and conflict of interest, raising the need for standardization.

Financial and non-financial conflicts of interests in psychiatry

A conflict of interests occurs when a doctor is unduly influenced by a secondary interest (i.e., a personal incentive) in his acts concerning one of the primary interests to which he is professionally committed (the welfare of patients, the progress of science, or the education of students or residents). One specific variety of conflicts of interests has monopolized the attention of the scientific and lay press: the financial conflicts of interests arising from the relationships between doctors and drug companies. A large literature has described the many, sometimes subtle, ways by which a psychiatrist can be influenced in his prescribing habits or research activities by his relationships with the industry. Some empirical evidence is now available in this area. On the other hand, it has been pointed out that the current debate on this issue is sometimes "affectively charged" or fails to take into account that the interests of patients, families and mental health professionals and those of the industry may be often convergent. Other types of conflicts of interests are beginning now to be discussed. There is evidence that the allegiance of a researcher to a given school of thought may influence the results of studies comparing different psychotherapeutic techniques, thus colliding with the primary interest represented by the progress of science. Political commitment is also emerging as a source of conflicts of interests. Financial and non-financial conflicts of interests are widespread in psychiatric practice and research. They cannot be eradicated, but must be managed more effectively than is currently the case.

Ethical perspectives on relations between industry and neuropsychiatric medicine

Conflicts of interest may influence medical research. In particular, the study on psychotropic treatment of ageing subjects suffering from neurological disorders and comorbid neuropsychiatric phenomena may be hypothetically considered economically non-advantageous, or even of negative impact on drug reputation, because of the high probability of non-response or side effects. Thus, studies on this issue may be disregarded from industry. We aimed to verify whether the global commitment of medical research reflects the actual relevance of depression in the world ageing population, associated or not with neurological conditions. Here, we: 1) have reviewed the literature on this issue, 2) have examined world published data concerning population by age, burden of disease and frequency of depressive disorders and antidepressant therapies, and 3) have reviewed the frequency of published papers on depression and its treatment associated with three neurological conditions. The overall rate of papers about depressive disorders in ageing people reflects adequately the world population and the prevalence of depression in the elderly. However, the rate of papers concerning medical experimentation for antidepressant treatment in Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and stroke is quite inadequate with respect to the rate of depressive disorders associated to these conditions. Thus, innovative medical experimentation must be encouraged, also in areas apparently of dubious economical advantage but of undoubted clinical relevance and the adoption of strategies to limit the detrimental effect of conflicts of interest in research must be enhanced.

Financial ties between DSM-IV panel members and the pharmaceutical industry

BACKGROUND

Increasing attention has been given to the transparency of potential conflicts of interest in clinical medicine and biomedical sciences, particularly in journal publishing and science advisory panels. The authors examined the degree and type of financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry of panel members responsible for revisions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders(DSM).

METHODS

By using multimodal screening techniques the authors investigated the financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry of 170 panel members who contributed to the diagnostic criteria produced for the DSM-IV and the DSM-IV-TR.

RESULTS

Of the 170 DSM panel members 95 (56%) had one or more financial associations with companies in the pharmaceutical industry. One hundred percent of the members of the panels on 'Mood Disorders' and 'Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders' had financial ties to drug companies. The leading categories of financial interest held by panel members were research funding (42%), consultancies (22%) and speakers bureau (16%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our inquiry into the relationships between DSM panel members and the pharmaceutical industry demonstrates that there are strong financial ties between the industry and those who are responsible for developing and modifying the diagnostic criteria for mental illness. The connections are especially strong in those diagnostic areas where drugs are the first line of treatment for mental disorders. Full disclosure by DSM panel members of their financial relationships with for-profit entities that manufacture drugs used in the treatment of mental illness is recommended.

The history of Helicobacter pylori: a reflection on the relationship between the medical community and industry

The paper deals with a viewpoint on the relationship between the drug industry and the medical world taking inspiration from the history of the discovery of Helicobacter pylori as a pathogenic agent in peptic disease.

Viewpoint: professional integrity in industry-sponsored clinical trials

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) relies on accurate data derived from well-designed, clinically relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Most randomized trials, however, are conducted by industry sponsors aiming at licensing and marketing drugs, which may weaken the usefulness of the findings to EBM. Disturbing evidence has emerged of widespread biases in industry-sponsored trials, including publication bias, selective reporting of findings, and distorted interpretation of results. These practices compromise the professional integrity of physician-investigators who contribute to them. In turn, the well-being of patients participating in RCTs may be jeopardized, and the evidence base upon which EBM is practiced may be corrupted. Regulatory reform alone will be inadequate to resolve these problems; attention must also be paid to physicians' professionalism. The authors recommend a change in the culture of academic medicine whereby physician-investigators who maintain professional integrity are rewarded or recognized. Educational interventions promoting integrity in clinical research may be one part of affecting such change.

Emerging findings in ethics of schizophrenia research

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review recent publications pertaining to six topics: investigators, professional integrity, and sources of potential bias; scientific designs; protocol safeguards; influences on research participation decisions and perceptions of risk; informed consent--decision-making capacity, appreciation and the therapeutic misconception, and voluntarism; and informed consent--intervention studies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Little empirical work has been conducted on investigator training and potential conflicts of interest. Numerous conceptual pieces have tackled controversial issues related to study designs, with the initial focal point being the ethics of placebo-controlled studies; only a handful of reports, however, have empirically addressed these topics. Emerging findings pertinent to protocol safeguards in schizophrenia research suggest general support by individuals with schizophrenia for a variety of safeguards. Recent work on influences on participation decisions suggests that people with schizophrenia use fundamentally similar considerations as medically ill people and healthy comparison participants--a combination of personal and altruistic motives. Much of the data-based literature has focused on informed consent. We highlight studies indicating that patients living with schizophrenia show heterogeneity in consent-related abilities but may possess key strengths in the research situation, not simply greater vulnerability as suggested in the historical literature. Furthermore, consent-related abilities appear to be enhanced with educational interventions.

SUMMARY

Empirical studies focusing on a variety of ethically relevant domains in schizophrenia research are needed. Future studies should incorporate quantitative and qualitative methods, integrate perspectives of stakeholders, and investigate the effects and appropriateness of current protocol safeguards.

The complexities of individual financial conflicts of interest

Academic health centers (AHCs) are unique resources that are critical for the advancement of science and the training of health care providers, scientists, and educators. AHCs depend on public trust. Certain financial relationships between medical school faculty and industry create situations that have the potential to be deleterious to AHCs. Yet, the translation of clinically relevant, scientific advances to products that directly impact patients' lives benefits from entrepreneurial activities, and such activities necessitate interactions between academia and industry. Society has a vested interest in protecting human research participants, maintaining objectivity in scientific research, and encouraging creative research with clinical applications. Conflicts of interest (COI) committees have been created by AHCs to evaluate faculty financial COI and to develop strategies to eliminate, reduce, or manage such conflicts. Issues involving financial COI are relevant to psychiatry. These issues are reviewed from the perspective of regulatory oversight provided by a medical school's COI committee.