An increasing number of clinical trials are funded by the pharmaceutical industry, and the industry as strong commercial interests in research publications that present their products positively and enhance their sales. As main sponsor of clinical trials, the pharmaceutical industry has gained unprecedented control over the evaluation of its own products and communication of research results. There is mounting evidence that industry-sponsored trials are biased in favor of the sponsor`s products.
Various potential ways have been described in which pharmaceutical concerns exert influence on the outcome of a study and its communication, however, publication bias proved to be a major cause for bias in industry-funded trials. Pharmaceutical industry and its sponsored investigators selectively report favorable outcomes, fail to publish whole studies with unfavorable results, or publish studies with favorable results multiple times. Such manipulation of research communication might greatly jeopardize the scientific basis for good clinical practice.
This article explores the aspects of clinical trial performance that can be affected by pharmaceutical company sponsorship, particularly emphasizing on results dissemination and publication. It is aimed at describing the relationship between pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and bias in research publication. By revealing the scope of the problem and its essence - it attempts to sensitize the scientific, professional and publishing societies and provoke
Als-Nielsen B, Chen W, Gluud C, Kjaergard LL. Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials: a reflection of treatment effect or adverse events? JAMA. 2003;290(7):921-8.
Becker-Brüser W. Research in the pharmaceutical industry cannot be objective. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2010;104(3):183-9.
Bekelman J, Li Y, Gross C. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: A systematic review. JAMA. 2003;289(4):454-65.
Bero LA, Rennie D. Influences on the quality of published drug studies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1996;12(2):209-37.
Davidoff F, DeAngelis C, Drazen J, Hoet J, Højgaard L, Horton R, et al. Sponsorship, authorship, and accountability (commentary). Lancet. 2001;358:854-6.
Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet. 1991;337:867-72.
Ghaemi SN, Shirzadi AA, Filkowski M. Publication bias and the pharmaceutical industry: The case of Lamotrigine in bipolar disorder. Medscape J Med. 2008;10(9):211.
Goldacre B. Bad Pharma: How drug companies mislead doctors and harm patients. London: Fourth Estate; 2012.
Golder S, Loke Y. Is there evidence for biased reporting of published adverse effects data in pharmaceutical industry-funded studies? Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;66(6):767-73.
Graf C, Battisti W, Bridges D, Winkler V, et al. Good publication practice for communicating company sponsored medical research: the GPP2 guidelines. BMJ. 2009;339:b4330.
ICMJE. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. [Cited 2014 Feb 1]. Available from: http://www.icmje.org/new_recommendations.html
Lathyris DN, Patsopoulos NA, Salanti G, Ioannidis JP. Industry sponsorship and selection of comparators in randomized clinical trials. European Journal of Clinical Investigation. 2010;40(2):172-82.
Lexchin J. Sponsorship bias in clinical research. Int J Risk Saf Med. 2012; 24(4): 233-42.
Lexchin J, Bero L, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ. 2003; 326(7400):1167.
Lundh A, Sismondo S, Lexchin J, Bero L. Industry sponsorship and research outcome (Review). The Cochrane Collaboration, JohnWiley & Sons; 2013.
Marcia A. Industry-Sponsored clinical research: A broken System. JAMA. 2008;300(9):1069-71.
Massie BM, Rothenberg D. Publication of sponsored symposiums in medical journals. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:1196-7.
McGauran N, Wieseler B, Kreis J, Schüler YB, Kölsch H, Kaiser T. Reporting bias in medical research - a narrative review. BioMed Central Trials. 2010;11:37.
Melander H, Ahlqvist-Rastad J, Meijer G, Beermann B. Evidence b(i)ased medicine: selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry; review of studies in new drug applications. BMJ. 2003;326:1171-3.
PhRMA. Principles on the conduct of clinical trials and communication of clinical trial results. 2011 Jul; 1-44. Available from: http://www.phrma.org/publications/policy_papers/phrma_clinical_trial_registry_
Ridker PM, Torres J. Reported outcomes in major cardiovascular clinical trials funded by forprofit and not-for-profit organizations: 2000-2005. JAMA. 2006;295(19):2270-4.
Rochon PA, Gurwitz JH, Simms RW, Fortin PR, Felson DT, Minaker KL, et al. A study of manufacturer-supported trials of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of arthritis. Arch Intern Med. 1994;154:157-63.
Schott G, Pachl H, Ludwig W. The relation between publication bias and clinical trials funding. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2010;104(4):314-22.
Schott G, Pachl H, Limbach U, Gundert-Remy U, Lieb K, Ludwig W. The financing of drug trials by pharmaceutical companies and its consequences: Part 2. A qualitative, systematic review of the literature on possible influences on authorship, access to trial data, and trial registration and publication. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2010;107(17):295-301.
Schott G, Pachl H, Limbach U, Gundert-Remy U, Ludwig W, Lieb K. 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(16):279-85.
Sismondo S. How pharmaceutical industry funding affects trial outcomes: Causal structures and responses. Social Science & Medicine. 2008 Feb 7. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.01.010
Sismondo S. Pharmaceutical company funding and its consequences: a qualitative systematic review. Contemporay Clinical Trials. 2008;29(2):109-13.
Song F, Eastwood AJ, Gilbody S, Duley L, Sutton AJ. Publication and related biases. Health Technology Assessment. 2000;4(10):1-105.
Song F, Parekh S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder J, Sutton AJ, et al. Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases. Health Technol Assess. 2010 Feb;14(8):iii, ix-xi, 1-193.
Stern JM, Simes RJ. Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. BMJ. 1997;315:640-5.
Email this article (Login required) 
