Impact of Funding Source on Clinical Trial Results Including Cardiovascular Outcome Trials

American Journal of Cardiology

Volumn 116, Issue 12, 2015, Pages 1944-1947

  Riaz, Haris ^a   Raza, Sajjad ^a   Khan, Muhammad Shahzeb ^b   Riaz, Irbaz Bin ^c   Krasuski, Richard A ^d  

^a LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b DOW UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES   (Pakistan)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^d DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTICOAGULANT AGENT; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT;

ANTICOAGULANT THERAPY; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE THERAPY; ARTICLE; DRUG INDUSTRY; FUNDING; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; NATIONAL HEALTH ORGANIZATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLISHING; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); ECONOMICS; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; UNITED STATES;

CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HUMANS; RESEARCH SUPPORT AS TOPIC; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84951757017     PISSN: 00029149     EISSN: 18791913     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.09.034     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. B. Als-Nielsen, W. Chen, C. Gluud, and L.L. Kjaergard Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials: a reflection of treatment effect or adverse events? JAMA 290 2003 921 928
2. J.E. Bekelman, Y. Li, and C.P. Gross Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review JAMA 289 2003 454 465
3. P.M. Ridker, and J. Torres Reported outcomes in major cardiovascular clinical trials funded by for-profit and not-for-profit organizations: 2000-2005 JAMA 295 2006 2270 2274
4. J. Lexchin, L.A. Bero, B. Djulbegovic, and O. Clark Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review BMJ 326 2003 1167 1170
5. C.D. DeAngelis, and P.B. Fontanarosa Impugning the integrity of medical science: the adverse effects of industry influence JAMA 299 2008 1833 1835
6. G. Schott, H. Pachl, U. Limbach, U. Gundert-Remy, W.D. Ludwig, and K. Lieb The financing of drug trials by pharmaceutical companies and its consequences. Part 1: a qualitative, systematic review of the literature on possible influences on the findings, protocols, and quality of drug trials Dtsch Arztebl Int 107 2010 279 285
7. K. Wahlbeck, and C. Adams Sponsored drug trials show more-favourable outcomes BMJ 318 1999 465
8. J. Peppercorn, E. Blood, E. Winer, and A. Partridge Association between pharmaceutical involvement and outcomes in breast cancer clinical trials Cancer 109 2007 1239 1246
9. J. Loscalzo The NIH budget and the future of biomedical research N Engl J Med 354 2006 1665 1667
10. H. Moses III, and E.R. Dorsey Biomedical research in an age of austerity JAMA 308 2012 2341 2342
11. P.A. Rochon, J.H. Gurwitz, R.W. Simms, P.R. Fortin, D.T. Felson, K.L. Minaker, and T.C. Chalmers A study of manufacturer-supported trials of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of arthritis Arch Intern Med 154 1994 157 163
12. S. Ngai, J.L. Gold, S.S. Gill, and P.A. Rochon Haunted manuscripts: ghost authorship in the medical literature Account Res 12 2005 103 114
13. J.S. Wislar, A. Flanagin, P.B. Fontanarosa, and C.D. Deangelis Honorary and ghost authorship in high impact biomedical journals: a cross sectional survey BMJ 343 2011 6128
14. P.C. Gøtzsche, A. Hróbjartsson, H.K. Johansen, M.T. Haahr, D.G. Altman, and A.W. Chan Ghost authorship in industry-initiated randomised trials Plos Med 4 2007 e19
15. N. Roper, and D. Korenstein Industry collaboration and primary guest authorship of high-impact randomized clinical trials: a cross-sectional study J Gen Intern Med 30 2015 1421 1425
16. J.S. Ross, K.P. Hill, D.S. Egilman, and H.M. Krumholz Guest authorship and ghostwriting in publications related to rofecoxib: a case study of industry documents from rofecoxib litigation JAMA 299 2008 1800 1812
17. A.-W. Chan, A. Hróbjartsson, M.T. Haahr, P.C. Gøtzsche, and D.G. Altman Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles JAMA 291 2004 2457 2465
18. E.R. Dorsey, J. de Roulet, J.P. Thompson, J.I. Reminick, A. Thai, Z. White-Stellato, C.A. Beck, B.P. George, and H. Moses III Funding of US biomedical research, 2003-2008 JAMA 303 2010 137 143
19. M.E. Flacco, L. Manzoli, S. Boccia, L. Capasso, K. Aleksovska, A. Rosso, G. Scaioli, C. De Vito, R. Siliquini, P. Villari, and J.P. Ioannidis Head-to-head randomized trials are mostly industry sponsored and almost always favor the industry sponsor J Clin Epidemiol 68 2015 811 820
20. C. Chuang-Stein, M. Beltangady, M. Dunne, and B. Morrison The ethics of non-inferiority trials Lancet 371 2008 895 896 author reply 896-897
21. E.Z. Soliman The ethics of non-inferiority trials Lancet 371 2008 895
22. A. Lundh, S. Sismondo, J. Lexchin, O.A. Busuioc, and L. Bero Industry sponsorship and research outcome Cochrane Database Syst Rev 12 2012 MR000033