|
Study on Participation of Pharmaceutical-Sponsored
Clinical Trials
Physicians who participated in a pharmaceutical-sponsored
clinical trial involving asthma medications maintained
adherence to treatment guidelines but were more likely
to prescribe the sponsor’s drugs, according to
a study in the June 21 issue of JAMA.
Pharmaceutical companies are frequently involved in
clinical trials in general practice, and this may trigger
an increase in the use of the sponsoring company’s
products due to the physicians’ experience with
these products. This effect may be further strengthened
by close physician-company cooperation, which may create
physician loyalty toward the company. The effect of
participation in company-sponsored studies on drug
preferences has not been evaluated in primary care.
Morten Andersen, M.D., Ph.D., of the University of
Southern Denmark, Odense, and colleagues investigated
the effects of physicians participating in a pharmaceutical
company-sponsored clinical trial that was aimed at
improving patients’ use of asthma medicine. The
study compared 10 practices that were conducting the
trial on asthma medicine with 165 control (non–trial-conducting)
practices in Funen County, Denmark. The study included
5,439 patients treated with asthma drugs from the trial-conducting
practices and 59,574 patients from the control practices.
The researchers found that the prevalence of inhaled
steroid use among asthma patients increased from 68.5
percent at baseline to 72.9 percent during the second
observation year in trial-conducting practices and
from 69.1 percent to 73.3 percent in control (non–trial-conducting)
practices. There was no impact of participating in
the trial on physicians’ adherence to international
treatment guidelines. Both trial-conducting and control
practices had a gradually increased use of the trial
sponsor’s inhaled corticosteroids, from 74.8
percent to 81.5 percent in trial-conducting practices
and from 73.6 percent to 76.6 percent in control practices.
Trial-conducting practices were 26 percent more likely
than control practices to have the trial sponsor’s
inhaled corticosteroids used. The trial sponsor’s
share of the total prescribed volume of asthma drugs
increased in trial-conducting practices compared with
control practices by 6.7 percent.
“Our study confirms the hypothesis that physician
involvement in clinical trials is a powerful tool for
influencing company-specific drug preferences. Several
mechanisms may be responsible, including setting up
a gift relationship by payment to the trial-conducting
physicians. If we had access to information on the
costs of the trial, it would have been possible to
evaluate if these trial costs were counterbalanced
by the revenue from the trial sponsor’s increased
market share. Whether conducting a clinical trial can
lead to minor improvements in guideline adherence can
only be addressed in large-scale studies,” the
authors write. |