OVARIAN CANCER and US: drug industry

Blog Archives: Nov 2004 - present

#ovariancancers



Special items: Ovarian Cancer and Us blog best viewed in Firefox

Search This Blog

Showing posts with label drug industry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drug industry. Show all posts

Monday, January 30, 2012

free to view for 7 days: Industry funded clinical trials: bias and quality, Current Medical Research and Opinion, Informa Healthcare



"The quality of the clinical data supporting the development and ultimately the approval for medical use of new drugs is often challenged. Many share the perception that the business goals of the pharmaceutical industry overrule the best scientific efforts to accrue critical knowledge on a new molecule, in order to inform investment of resources, regulatory approvals and appropriate use by patients. Despite this common belief, few scientists have attempted to assess objectively the quality of industry funded (IF) clinical trials by measuring it and comparing it with non-industry funded (NIF) clinical trials in a data-driven fashion. Overall, the average quality of IF clinical research has been reported to be higher than the quality of NIF clinical research."

Monday, April 18, 2011

What did these pharma marketers think they were going to hear by inviting bioethicist Carl Elliott? - Gary Schwitzer's HealthNewsReview Blog



What did these pharma marketers think they were going to hear by inviting bioethicist Carl Elliott?


The DTC (direct to consumer) National Conference ("The Forum for DTC Thought Leaders") invited tough-talking, straight-shooting bioethicist Carl Elliott to speak this year.


Then, at least according to this account, some didn't like "the feeling" that he imparted.


Scroll down to "Day One - Afternoon." If you didn't want to hear that "everything is broken - our government, our healthcare system, and the clinical trials side of the industry," then maybe Elliott was not the guy to invite.


Health care journalists who haven't had the opportunity to meet Elliott can do so this weekend at the Association of Health Care Journalists conference in Philadelphia, where he'll be on a panel, "Clinical trials: Intersection of ethical, practical and financial." Hint: If you don't want to hear what's broken, don't come.

Monday, February 28, 2011

Clinical practice guidelines as marketing tools -- Collier 183 (3): E141 -- Canadian Medical Association Journal



Blogger's Note: bias exist no matter the source, what does matter is the degree and ultimately the intent (ethics)
 ....................................................................................
"If the guidelines are funded by government or private donors, a bias toward recommending particular pharmaceuticals may not be present."

Saturday, July 31, 2010

EvidenceUpdates: Cochrane Collaboration review: Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults including professional commentaries and warning



CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccines have a modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost. There is no evidence that they affect complications, such as pneumonia, or transmission.

WARNING: This review includes 15 out of 36 trials funded by industry (four had no funding declaration). An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry funded studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited more than other studies independently from methodological quality and size. Studies funded from public sources were significantly less likely to report conclusions favorable to the vaccines. The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions and spurious notoriety of the studies. The content and conclusions of this review should be interpreted in light of this finding.

Also: link to the Cochrane Collaboration review (The Cochrane Library):

Background
Different types of influenza vaccines are currently produced worldwide. Healthy adults are presently targeted mainly in North America.

Objectives
Identify, retrieve and assess all studies evaluating the effects of vaccines against influenza in healthy adults

Authors' conclusions

Influenza vaccines have a modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost. There is no evidence that they affect complications, such as pneumonia, or transmission.

WARNING:
This review includes 15 out of 36 trials funded by industry (four had no funding declaration). An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry funded studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited more than other studies independently from methodological quality and size. Studies funded from public sources were significantly less likely to report conclusions favorable to the vaccines. The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions and spurious notoriety of the studies. The content and conclusions of this review should be interpreted in light of this finding.





Plain language summary

Vaccines to prevent influenza in healthy adults
Over 200 viruses cause influenza and influenza-like illness which produce the same symptoms (fever, headache, aches and pains, cough and runny noses). Without laboratory tests, doctors cannot tell the two illnesses apart. Both last for days and rarely lead to death or serious illness. At best, vaccines might be effective against only influenza A and B, which represent about 10% of all circulating viruses. Each year, the World Health Organization recommends which viral strains should be included in vaccinations for the forthcoming season.

Authors of this review assessed all trials that compared vaccinated people with unvaccinated people. The combined results of these trials showed that under ideal conditions (vaccine completely matching circulating viral configuration) 33 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to avoid one set of influenza symptoms. In average conditions (partially matching vaccine) 100 people need to be vaccinated to avoid one set of influenza symptoms. Vaccine use did not affect the number of people hospitalised or working days lost but caused one case of Guillian-Barré syndrome (a major neurological condition leading to paralysis) for every one million vaccinations. Fifteen of the 36 trials were funded by vaccine companies and four had no funding declaration. Our results may be an optimistic estimate because company-sponsored influenza vaccines trials tend to produce results favorable to their products and some of the evidence comes from trials carried out in ideal viral circulation and matching conditions and because the harms evidence base is limited.