As drug industry’s influence over research grows, so does the potential for bias

For drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline, the 17-page article in the New England Journal of Medicine represented a coup.

The 2006 report described a trial that compared three diabetes drugs and concluded that Avandia, the company’s new drug, performed best.

“We now have clear evidence from a large international study that the initial use of [Avandia] is more effective than standard therapies,” a senior vice president of GlaxoSmithKline, Lawson Macartney, said in a news release.

What only careful readers of the article would have gleaned is the extent of the financial connections between the drugmaker and the research. The trial had been funded by GlaxoSmithKline, and each of the 11 authors had received money from the company. Four were employees and held company stock. The other seven were academic experts who had received grants or consultant fees from the firm.

» via Washington Post

Notes

  1. nsfwasm reblogged this from infoneer-pulse
  2. ottoborden reblogged this from infoneer-pulse
  3. thacreolecrusher28 reblogged this from infoneer-pulse
  4. ketchuma reblogged this from infoneer-pulse and added:
    So now let’s enforce 2007 mandate to deposit all clinical trial results, including negative, in ClinicalTrials.gov for...
  5. oneofyoursecrets reblogged this from infoneer-pulse and added:
    [Washington...
  6. hamletstragicflaw reblogged this from infoneer-pulse
  7. ahandsomestark reblogged this from infoneer-pulse
  8. infoneer-pulse posted this