industry-sponsored studies

[Guest guest]

I checked out Ellen's link to the People's Pharmacy article on quinine, and saw another interesting item there: Funding Makes a Difference in Study ResultsSeptember 23, 2010 in Health NewsResearchers pride themselves on their scientific objectivity. They like to think that they are immune to bias based on funding source or other influence. A new analysis of studies of anemia drugs called EPOs suggests that drug company support has an impact on basic research findings. Of the industry-sponsored studies, none found significant harmful effects. Over 50 percent of independently funded studies reported harmful effects.The researchers were specifically looking to see whether EPO-type anemia drugs might stimulate cancer cell progression. Since such drugs are frequently given to cancer patients, this was a critical question early in the development of such medications. Clinical trials eventually confirmed that these drugs are associated with a higher risks of death from cancer. The authors conclude that both basic research as well as clinical trials may suffer from such conflicts of interest.[Archives of Internal Medicine, Sept. 13, 2010]I don't think we should avoid industry-sponsored trials because of this not-surprising bias, but it might be good to look at the reported results of these studies with a bit of skepticism. For myself, I am planning to participate in an industry-funded study of a Btk inhibitor with Dr. Furman, whom I saw for a second opinion. I trust his judgment that this could be a helpful drug in my case.I haven't posted in awhile, so here's an update: I was dx Nov. 2006, had tx -- 4 cycles of RF -- 12/08 - 3/09. Had a nice remission, but progressed within 3 months. I need tx again now, as my CLL has become more aggressive: my WBC recently doubled in 3 months, and a new FISH showed an 11q (ATM gene) deletion. So I'm looking forward to starting the trial as soon as it's OK'd. SchafferNYC