Frequency, type, and monetary value of financial conflicts of interest in cancer clinical research.

PURPOSE: Using data from American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meetings, we determined the frequency, type, and monetary value of researchers' financial interests. METHODS: Financial disclosures for the 2004 (3,529 abstracts and 25,416 authors) and 2005 (3,556 abstracts and 26,181 authors) ASCO Annual Meetings were categorized into four groups: no author with a financial interest, research funding only, employment and leadership positions only, or at least one author with a personal financial interest. Interests were stratified by monetary value and other factors. RESULTS: In 2004 and 2005, 23% of abstracts had one or more authors with a personal financial interest. More than 75% of all personal financial interests were valued at less than $10,000. More than 90% of financial interests of more than $100,000 were employment related. Fewer than 3.5% of authors with personal financial interests had interests valued at more than $100,000. Overall, 6.3% (2004) and 2.9% (2005) of abstracts only had research funding, whereas 7.3% (2004) and 6.9% (2005) had only commercial employment. In 2005, 60% of plenary sessions compared with 23.1% in general poster sessions and 17.3% for publish-only abstracts reported financial ties. Personal financial interests were more common among US authors compared with non-US authors (9.2% v 4.2%). CONCLUSION: About one fourth of abstracts at ASCO Annual Meetings have an author with a personal financial interest. Most personal financial interests are valued at less than $10,000 per year, whereas a majority valued at more than $100,000 are related to employees of commercial entities.

Patients' views on financial conflicts of interest in cancer research trials.

BACKGROUND: Financial ties between researchers or medical centers and companies whose drugs are being tested have come under increasing scrutiny. METHODS: We conducted in-person interviews with 253 patients in cancer-research trials (a 93% response rate) at five U.S. medical centers to determine their attitudes regarding potential financial conflicts of interest among researchers and medical centers. RESULTS: More than 90% of patients expressed little or no worry about financial ties that researchers or institutions might have with drug companies. Most patients said they would have enrolled in the trial even if the drug company had paid the researcher for speaking (82% of those interviewed) or consulting (75%) or if the researcher had received royalty payments (70%) or owned stock in the company (76%). Similarly, most patients would have enrolled in the trial if their cancer center had owned stock in the drug company (77%) or received royalty payments from the company (79%). Most patients believed it was ethical for researchers to receive speaking fees (81%) or consulting fees (82%) from the company. However, a substantial minority of patients wanted disclosure of the oversight system for researchers (40%) and of researchers' financial interests (31%); 17% thought no disclosure to patients was necessary. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients in cancer-research trials were not worried about financial ties between researchers or medical centers and drug companies and would still have enrolled in the trial if they had known about such financial ties. A substantial minority wanted to be informed about the oversight system to protect against financial conflicts of interest and about researchers' financial interests.