Transcript Lurie
Financial Conflicts of Interest:
The Limits of Disclosure
and Management
Peter Lurie, MD, MPH
Public Citizen’s Health Research Group
Presented at:
Conflicts of Interest, Privacy/Confidentiality,
and Tissue Repositories:
Protections, Policies, and Practical Strategies
PRIM&R Conference
Boston, Massachusetts, May 3, 2004
Conflicts of Interest Affect …
•
•
•
•
•
•
Study design
Research ethics
Publication (or not)
Data presentation
Scientific debates
Regulatory Review
Placebo-controlled Trials of
Acyclovir to Suppress
Recurrent Herpes Genitalis
Percent Recurrence-free
100
90
Average acyclovir response in
1st 2 studies
80
70
60
Placebo
50
Acyclovir
40
30
Average placebo response
in 1st 2 studies
20
10
0
0
1
2
1984
3
4
5
1985
6
7
8
1986
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
1988
89,91,92,94
Study Number and Year Published
1997
1998
A Drug Company-sponsored Unethical
Clinical Trial in Developing Countries
•
•
•
•
Discovery Laboratories, Doylestown, PA
Synthetic surfactant (Surfaxin)
4 surfactants on the market (1st in 1990)
Associated with 34% relative reduction in
neonatal mortality (Cochrane metaanalysis)
“Without doubt the most thoroughly
studied new therapy in neonatal care”
(NEJM review)
A Drug Company-sponsored Unethical
Clinical Trial in Developing Countries
• Title of internal FDA meeting: “Use of
placebo-controls in life threatening
diseases: is the developing world the
answer?”
• Location: Mexico, Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador
• Design: Surfaxin vs. placebo (vs.
approved surfactant)
42 Randomized Trials of Natural and
Synthetic Surfactant in the Treatment of
Neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome
9
Number of trials
8
7
6
5
No Placebo
Placebo
4
3
2
1
0
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Year of Publication
A Drug Company-sponsored Unethical
Clinical Trial in Developing Countries
• February 2001: Public Citizen writes to
HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson
• March 2001: Bolivian health ministry says
the study is “totally prohibited” for legal,
ethical and social reasons
• April 2001: Discovery announces study
changed to compare to known effective
surfactant
April 15, 1997
Content of Medical School-Industry
Multicenter Trial Contracts
Median Percentage of Contracts
12%
10%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
1%
0%
0%
Data collection and
monitoring
Source: NEJM 2002;3471335-41
All authors have
access to data
Trial results must be
published
Depiction of Alosetron (Lotronex)
Efficacy in Lancet
Source: Lancet 2000;355:1035-40
Public Citizen Depiction of Alosetron
(Lotronex) Efficacy
4.0
Mean Pain/Discomfort Score
3.5
3.0
2.5
1.97
Placebo
Alosetron
2.0
1.85
1.40
1.5
1.24
1.24
1.33
1.0
1.07
1.00
0.5
0.0
0
1
2
Month of Treatment
Source: Lancet 2000;356:2009
3
The Debate Over the Safety of
Calcium Channel Blockers
Financial Relationship with Sponsors
100%
90%
96%
80%
70%
60%
60%
50%
40%
37%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Support
Source: NEJM 1998;338:101-6
Neutral
Critical
FDA AC Member Recusals in
Drug Procuct-Specific Meetings
• 18 recusals (1.5%) in 81 meetings in study period
• Through January 2002: 7 recusals; 0% reason given
• After January 2002: 11 recusals; 36% reason given
• Examples of recusals:
Research and consulting on topic of scientific meeting
Principal investigator of related clinical trial
Research on competing products and consulting on product
at issue
Invention of competing product
Disclosed Conflict Rates for AC
Members and Consultants*
Through
January 2002
After
January 2002
Total
Per meeting COI
rate**
92%
87%
89%
Per person-meeting
COI rate***
24%
20%
22%
*Includes recusals
**Percentage of 81 meetings where at least 1 COI was disclosed
***Percentage of 1220 AC member or consultant person-meetings disclosing a COI
Value of Particular Conflict Types for
AC Members and Consultants,
January 1, 2001-June 30, 2003*
Consulting arrangements (n=114)
18%
Investments (n=78)
10%
4%
22%
No value given
33%
$0-5,000
$5,001-25,000
$25,001-50,000
$50,001-100,000
$0-10,000
$10,001-50,000
73%
41%
*Excludes 99 conflicts through January 2002 without any conflict-type details
Conclusions
• Conflict of interest permeates the entire
research process
• Financial conflict of interest, in particular,
has an adverse impact upon the public
face of science
• Some conflicts are so worrisome that
disclosure and “management” will not
suffice