Bias Seen in U.S. Drug Study Reporting

A review of 48 U.S. drug studies in the American Journal of Medicine Wednesday showed apparent bias in those sponsored by pharmaceutical companies.

Of the 48, every one of the 30 sponsored papers reported favorable results, while only 12 of the 18 not supported by a pharmaceutical company were positive.

The authors propose three principles for medical societies to maintain the integrity of presentations about commercial products — a requirement for full disclosure of financial support, an explicit policy of accepting negative studies as well as positive studies, and a series of lectures, discussions and debates at the annual meetings to help everyone recognize conflicts of interest and scientific bias.

In an editorial in the same issue, Dr. Seth Landefeld suggests the measures would be insufficient.

The recommended steps are eminently reasonable and hopelessly inadequate, he wrote. Disclosure of financial conflicts of interest likely has limited effects and may not eliminate bias or its effects on practice.

Rather, he suggested the creation of an independent agency funded by pooled resources from the pharmaceutical industry that would sponsor such drug studies.