More than a third of doctors who sit on the review boards that oversee the integrity of clinical trials have financial ties with companies whose drugs are being tested in those trials.

That's the finding of a new study in the Nov. 30 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine. The researchers also found that the vast majority of review board members surveyed - 85.5 percent - believed that industry ties do not affect members' decisions in any inappropriate way.

It's hard to tell whether those links would affect the quality of the studies, added lead researcher Eric G. Campbell, an assistant professor of health policy at the University of Massachusetts. "That would require a different methodology, going back to cases where there are problems and tracing whether a relationship had an effect," he said.

The study included 893 professionals who sat on review boards at 100 academic institutions.

Most thought their ties to industry wouldn't affect their decisions. However, 78 physicians - 15.1 percent of those questioned - said that at least one proposed trial had come before them in the prior year that had been sponsored either by a company with which they had a financial relationship, or a competitor of that company.

Financial ties with health-care companies are inevitable and "a fundamental part" of medicine, Campbell said. "They have benefits and they have risks," he said, and the question is how to prevent them from biasing studies.

"Clearly disclosure of relationships is required, because institutions can't handle what they don't know about," Campbell said.

After the basic step of open disclosure, institutions must "develop a set of policies regarding which relationships are acceptable and which are not, and follow those policies," he said. Each institution should set standards fitting its particular needs, Campbell said.

Dr. Ezekiel J. Emanuel, chairman of clinical bioethics at the U.S. National Institutes of Health and the author of a related report in the same issue of the journal, agreed.

"We need to move this debate off what we disclose, because disclosures [themselves] are not a very good safeguard," said Emanuel, who has been a major figure in the field of potential conflicts of interest. Instead, he said, "we have to be sure that our oversight mechanisms that our conflict of interest boards use are effective."

Emanuel's report is based on interviews with 253 patients enrolled in cancer research trials. It found that, for the most part, patients don't pay much heed to these issues.

"More than 90 percent of patients expressed little or no worry about financial ties that researchers or institutions might have with drug companies," the report concluded. Roughly three-quarters of cancer patients said they would have enrolled in the trial even if the investigator had been paid royalties or owned stock in the company making the drug.

That is quite understandable, Emanuel said, since study participants "are very vulnerable, have a serious problem and want someone to care for it. They appreciate -- especially cancer patients -- that cooperation is required between industry and cancer researchers, and that money is necessary for there to be progress."

Still, 40 percent of the patients wanted disclosure of the oversight system for researchers and 31 percent wanted to know about the researcher's financial interests. Only 17 percent thought that no disclosure to patients was necessary.

More information

The official word on institutional review boards is available from the FDA.


Related Content

News | Cardiac Imaging

May 17, 2024 — The Cum Laude Award-Winning Online Poster presented during the 124th ARRS Annual Meeting found that the ...

Time May 17, 2024
arrow
News | Computed Tomography (CT)

September 19, 2023 — An advanced CT test can identify individuals with stable angina at a reduced risk of three-year ...

Time September 19, 2023
arrow
News | SPECT-CT

September 12, 2022 — Royal Philips, a global leader in health technology, announced new milestones in the development of ...

Time September 12, 2022
arrow
News | Contrast Media

August 2, 2022 – A new update has been announced as the radiology world continues to address supply disruptions of ...

Time August 02, 2022
arrow
News | Mobile C-Arms

July 29, 2022 — Siemens Healthineers has announced the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clearance of the ARTIS icono ...

Time July 29, 2022
arrow
News | Mobile C-Arms

January 18, 2022 – Philips Healthcare announced physicians will now have access to advanced new 3D image guidance ...

Time January 18, 2022
arrow
Feature | Mobile C-Arms | By Bhvita Jani

With the postponement of non-essential elective surgeries and medical procedures in 2020 to conserve medical resources ...

Time July 07, 2021
arrow
News | Angiography

December 3, 2020 — GE Healthcare is introducing a new version of its robotic driven angiography system for image guided ...

Time December 01, 2020
arrow
News | Mobile C-Arms

August 18, 2020 — Ziehm Imaging announces the acquisition of Therenva, a French-based developer of planning and imaging ...

Time August 18, 2020
arrow
News | Computed Tomography (CT)

February 10, 2020 — The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has cleared patient-specific airway stents developed by ...

Time February 10, 2020
arrow
Subscribe Now