IN WHAT amounts to an open challenge to the pharmaceutical industry, a University of Sydney study has found that industry-sponsored studies are more likely to favour products of pharmaceuticals and medical devices than non-industry funded research.
The new Cochrane Library Review, which adds 27 studies to update a previous Cochrane review, confirms earlier analyses by "providing definitive evidence that pharmaceutical industry funding of drug studies biases the results and conclusions to look favourable towards the drug of the sponsor," said senior author, Professor Lisa Bero of the University of Sydney's Charles Perkins Centre.
Bero called for bias assessment tools for drug studies that take funding sources into account, while noting that several journals now require that the role of the sponsor in the design, conduct and publication of the study be described.
Bero said there were several potential ways that industry sponsors could influence the outcome of a study, including the framing of questions, the design of a study, the conduct of a study, how data are analysed, selective reporting of favourable results, and "spin" in reporting conclusions.
"Currently, we have no validated way to detect or evaluate these subtle but systematic biases," Bero explained.
Co-author of the review, Dr Joel Lexchin from York University, said the results were concerning for both patients and doctors.
"Our views about the effectiveness and safety of many medicines may be distorted.
"Medicines may be both less safe and less effective than we think," Lexchin added.
The above article was sent to subscribers in Pharmacy Daily's issue from 24 Feb 17
To see the full newsletter, see the embedded issue below or CLICK HERE to download Pharmacy Daily from 24 Feb 17
