The nature and influence of pharmaceutical industry involvement in asthma trials

Canadian Respiratory Journal

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 267-271

  Bond, Kenneth ^a   Spooner, Carol ^b   Tjosvold, Lisa ^a   Lemière, Catherine ^c   Rowe, Brian H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^c HÔPITAL DU SACRÉ COEUR DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Asthma; Bias; Evidence based medicine; Inhaled corticosteroids; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

BETA 2 ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR STIMULATING AGENT; CORTICOSTEROID;

ARTICLE; ASTHMA; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG INDUSTRY; FUNDING; HUMAN; LUNG FUNCTION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EID: 84865157709     PISSN: 11982241     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1155/2012/890457     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Liss H. Publication bias in the pulmonary/allergy literature: Effect of pharmaceutical company sponsorship. Isr Med Assoc J 2006;8:451-4. (Pubitemid 44122021)
2. Chan AW, Krleza-Jeric K, Schmid I, Altman DG. Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. CMAJ 2004;171:735-40. (Pubitemid 39319090)
3. Jorgensen AW, Maric KL, Tendal B, Faurschou A, Gøtzsche PC. Industry-supported meta-analysies compared with meta-analyses with non-profit or no support: Differences in methodological quality and conclusions. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008;8:60.
4. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: Systematic review. BMJ 2003;326:1167-70. (Pubitemid 36649048)
5. Sismondo S. Pharmaceutical company funding and its consequences: A qualitative systematic review. Contemp Clin Trials 2008;29:109-13. (Pubitemid 351248768)
6. Turner E, Matthews AM, Linardatos E, Tell RA, Rosenthal R. Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. N Engl J Med 2008;358:252-60.
7. Als-Nielsen, Chen W, Gluud C, Kjaergard LL. Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials. JAMA 2003;290:921-8.
8. McGregor M, Xie X, Dendukuri N. The use of quality instruments to weight evidence from RCTs [oral presentation]. 2011 CADTH (Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health) Symposium, Vancouver, British Columbia, April 4, 2011.
9. Jagsi R, Sheets N, Jankovic A, Motomura AR, Amarnath S, Ubel PA. Frequency, nature, effects, and correlates of conflicts of interest in published clinical cancer research. Cancer 2009;115:2783-91.
10. IOM (Institute of Medicine). Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2009
11. Bond K, Coyle D, O'Gorman K, et al. Long-acting beta2-agonist and inhaled corticosteroid combination therapy for adult persistent asthma: Systematic review of clinical outcomes and economic evaluation [Technology report number 122]. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2009.
12. Fugh-Berman A, Dodgson S. The ethics of publication planning in the pharmaceutical industry. Open Med 2008;2:e33-6.
13. Matheson A. Corporate science and the husbandry of scientific and medical knowledge by the pharmaceutical industry. Biosocieties 2009;3:355-82.
14. Sismondo S. Ghost management: How much of the medical literature is shaped behind the scenes by the pharmaceutical industry? PLoS Medicine 2007;4:e286.
15. Sterne J, Egger M, Moher D, editors. Chapter 10: Addressing reporting biases. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.0.1 [updated September 2008] ed. Oxford: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2008;1:297-333.
16. Krahn MD, Berka C, Langlois P, Detsky AS. Direct and indirect costs of asthma in Canada, 1990. CMAJ 1996;154:821-31. (Pubitemid 26097872)
17. Van Ganse E, Laforest L, Pietri G, et al. Persistent asthma: disease control, resource utilization and direct costs. Eur Resp J 2002;20:260-7.
18. Singh J, Murphy S, Bhandari M. Trial sample size, but not trial quality, is associated with positive study outcome. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;63:154-62.
19. Goodman SN. Toward evidence-based medical statistics. 1: The p value fallacy. Ann Intern Med 1999;130:995-1004. (Pubitemid 29283991)
20. Drenth JPH. Multiple authorship. The contribution of senior authors. JAMA 1998;280:219-21. (Pubitemid 28493886)
21. Sackett DL, Oxman AD. HARLOT plc: An amalgamation of the world's two oldest professions. BMJ 2003;327:1442-5. (Pubitemid 38045815)
22. Doucet M, Sismondo S. Evaluating solutions to sponsorship bias. J Med Ethics 2008;34:627-30.
23. Schafer A. Biomedical conflicts of interest: A defence of the sequestration thesis - learning from the cases of Nancy Olivieri and David Healy. J Med Ethics 2004;30:8-24.
24. Coyle SL. Ethics and Human Rights Committee, and American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine. Physician-industry relations. Part 1. Individual physicians. Ann Intern Med 2002;136:396-402.
25. Rochon P, Hoey J, Chan AW, et al. Financial conflicts of interest checklist 2010 for clinical research studies. Open Med 2010;4:e69.