FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 343:1616-1620 November 30, 2000 Number 22 Next

	Full Text PDF Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited PubMed Citation

ABSTRACT

Background There is substantial concern that financial conflicts of interest on the part of investigators conducting clinical trials may compromise the well-being of research subjects.

Methods We analyzed policies governing conflicts of interest at the 10 medical schools in the United States that receive the largest amount of research funding from the National Institutes of Health. These institutions are Baylor College of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, Harvard Medical School, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, the University of California at Los Angeles School of Medicine, the University of California at San Francisco School of Medicine, the University of Washington School of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine at St. Louis, and Yale University School of Medicine.

Results All 10 universities required that faculty members disclose financial interests to university officials. Only four required disclosure by all members of the research staff. Five universities required disclosure of all financial interests, even though federal regulations specify a threshold for disclosure. Six universities required disclosure to the institutional review board as well as to a committee on conflicts of interest or a university official. Four universities had stricter requirements for investigators conducting clinical trials than required by federal regulations. One university prohibited investigators from having stock, stock options, consulting agreements, or decision-making positions involving a company that sponsored the research. A second university prohibited researchers from trading stock or stock options in a company that sponsored the research or sold the product or device under study. Two universities ordinarily did not allow faculty members to participate in clinical research if they had what federal regulations refer to as a "significant" financial interest in the company owning the product or device being studied, but exceptions were allowed.

Conclusions Policies governing conflicts of interest at leading medical schools in the United States vary widely. We suggest that university-based investigators and research staff be prohibited from holding stock, stock options, or decision-making positions in a company that may reasonably appear to be affected by the results of their clinical research. Of the 10 medical schools we studied, only 1 had a policy that was close to this standard.

Source Information

From the Program in Medical Ethics (B.L., L.E.W.), the Center for AIDS Prevention Studies (B.L., L.E.W.), the Division of General Internal Medicine (B.L., L.E.W.), and the Office of Student Affairs (A.B.), University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco.

Address reprint requests to Dr. Lo at bernie{at}medicine.ucsf.edu.

Full Text of this Article

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Parascandola, M. (2007). A Turning Point for Conflicts of Interest: The Controversy Over the National Academy of Sciences' First Conflicts of Interest Disclosure Policy. JCO 25: 3774-3779 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Gray, S. W., Hlubocky, F. J., Ratain, M. J., Daugherty, C. K. (2007). Attitudes Toward Research Participation and Investigator Conflicts of Interest Among Advanced Cancer Patients Participating in Early Phase Clinical Trials. JCO 25: 3488-3494 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Jacobs, J. J., Galante, J. O., Mirza, S. K., Zdeblick, T. (2006). Symposium. Relationships with Industry: Critical for New Technology or an Unnecessary Evil?. JBJS 88: 1650-1663 [Full Text]  
• Stossel, T. P. (2005). Regulating Academic-Industrial Research Relationships -- Solving Problems or Stifling Progress?. NEJM 353: 1060-1065 [Full Text]  
• Emanuel, E. J., Wood, A., Fleischman, A., Bowen, A., Getz, K. A., Grady, C., Levine, C., Hammerschmidt, D. E., Faden, R., Eckenwiler, L., Muse, C. T., Sugarman, J. (2004). Oversight of Human Participants Research: Identifying Problems To Evaluate Reform Proposals. ANN INTERN MED 141: 282-291 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Helft, P. R., Ratain, M. J., Epstein, R. A., Siegler, M. (2004). Inside Information: Financial Conflicts of Interest for Research Subjects in Early Phase Clinical Trials. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 96: 656-661 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Kim, S Y H, Millard, R W, Nisbet, P, Cox, C, Caine, E D (2004). Potential research participants' views regarding researcher and institutional financial conflicts of interest. J. Med. Ethics 30: 73-79 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Bruce Fye, W. (2003). The power of clinical trials and guidelines,and the challenge of conflicts of interest. J Am Coll Cardiol 41: 1237-1242 [Full Text]  
• Bekelman, J. E., Li, Y., Gross, C. P. (2003). Scope and Impact of Financial Conflicts of Interest in Biomedical Research: A Systematic Review. JAMA 289: 454-465 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Schulman, K. A., Seils, D. M., Timbie, J. W., Sugarman, J., Dame, L. A., Weinfurt, K. P., Mark, D. B., Califf, R. M. (2002). A National Survey of Provisions in Clinical-Trial Agreements between Medical Schools and Industry Sponsors. NEJM 347: 1335-1341 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Gelijns, A. C., Thier, S. O. (2002). Medical Innovation and Institutional Interdependence: Rethinking University-Industry Connections. JAMA 287: 72-77 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Kalb, P. E., Koehler, K. G. (2002). Legal Issues in Scientific Research. JAMA 287: 85-91 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Abzug, M. J., Esterl, E. A. (2001). Establishment of a Clinical Trials Office at a Children's Hospital. Pediatrics 108: 1129-1134 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Lewis, S., Baird, P., Evans, R. G., Ghali, W. A., Wright, C. J., Gibson, E., Baylis, F. (2001). Dancing with the porcupine: rules for governing the university-industry relationship. CMAJ 165: 783-785 [Full Text]  
• DeAngelis, C. D., Fontanarosa, P. B., Flanagin, A. (2001). Reporting Financial Conflicts of Interest and Relationships Between Investigators and Research Sponsors. JAMA 286: 89-91 [Full Text]  
• Parmley, W. W. (2001). Changing guidelines on conflict of interest. J Am Coll Cardiol 37: 1749-1750 [Full Text]  
• Topol, E. J., Nurok, M., Ratain, M. J., Sheridan, M. E., Lo, B., Wolf, L., McCrary, S. V., McCullough, L. B., Brody, B. A., Martin, J. B., Kasper, D. L. (2001). Conflict-of-Interest Policies. NEJM 344: 1017-1018 [Full Text]  
• Drazen, J. M., Koski, G. (2000). To Protect Those Who Serve. NEJM 343: 1643-1645 [Full Text]  
• Martin, J. B., Kasper, D. L. (2000). In Whose Best Interest? Breaching the Academic-Industrial Wall. NEJM 343: 1646-1649 [Full Text]