HHS Public Access Author manuscript Author Manuscript
Urol Pract. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2017 August 01. Published in final edited form as: Urol Pract. 2017 July ; 4(4): 347–.
Editorial Comment: Industry Payments to Urologists in 2014: an Analysis of the Open Payments Program Jathin Bandari, M.D. and Bruce L. Jacobs, M.D., M.P.H. Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
Author Manuscript
We commend the authors for their timely analysis of urologists in the Sunshine Act. Although there has been considerable effort to scrutinize industry’s relationship with prescriber practices, this study gives much deserved consideration to industry’s effect on urological research. The authors’ findings are consistent with the observation that up to 70% of drug research is funded by industry, a trend that arose from the increased costs of establishing safety and efficacy of treatments for chronic illnesses.1 Indeed, the primary reasons for trial failure in the oncologic literature include poor accrual, sponsor cancellation and budget shortfalls.2 All signs point to the uncomfortable fact that industry possesses an ever-growing influence on trials and, when results contradict the sponsor’s fiduciary interests, this influence may be inappropriate.
Author Manuscript
While we thank the authors for investigating an important topic, we question the finding that only 6.7% of industry-sponsored research funding is directed towards teaching hospitals. This finding does not corroborate the aforementioned national trends in which there is a disproportional accrual and funding burden on academic institutions. Instead, we have found in our own work with this database that many beneficiaries of research funding are subsidiaries of teaching hospitals whose names are not listed under the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ specifications.3 Thus, while the analysis remains true to the database’s definitions, its interpretation should be taken in light of this limitation.
References
Author Manuscript
1. Bodenheimer T. Uneasy alliance--clinical investigators and the pharmaceutical industry. N Engl J Med. 2000; 342:1539. [PubMed: 10816196] 2. Stensland KD, McBride RB, Latif A, et al. Adult cancer clinical trials that fail to complete: an epidemic? J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014; 106 3. Services, C. f. M. a. M. https://www.cms.gov/OpenPayments/Downloads/Teaching-HospitalList-2014-Open-Payments-Cycle-[October-2014].pdf
Urol Pract. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2017 August 01. Published in final edited form as: Urol Pract. 2017 July ; 4(4): 347–.
Editorial Comment: Industry Payments to Urologists in 2014: an Analysis of the Open Payments Program Jathin Bandari, M.D. and Bruce L. Jacobs, M.D., M.P.H. Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
Author Manuscript
We commend the authors for their timely analysis of urologists in the Sunshine Act. Although there has been considerable effort to scrutinize industry’s relationship with prescriber practices, this study gives much deserved consideration to industry’s effect on urological research. The authors’ findings are consistent with the observation that up to 70% of drug research is funded by industry, a trend that arose from the increased costs of establishing safety and efficacy of treatments for chronic illnesses.1 Indeed, the primary reasons for trial failure in the oncologic literature include poor accrual, sponsor cancellation and budget shortfalls.2 All signs point to the uncomfortable fact that industry possesses an ever-growing influence on trials and, when results contradict the sponsor’s fiduciary interests, this influence may be inappropriate.
Author Manuscript
While we thank the authors for investigating an important topic, we question the finding that only 6.7% of industry-sponsored research funding is directed towards teaching hospitals. This finding does not corroborate the aforementioned national trends in which there is a disproportional accrual and funding burden on academic institutions. Instead, we have found in our own work with this database that many beneficiaries of research funding are subsidiaries of teaching hospitals whose names are not listed under the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ specifications.3 Thus, while the analysis remains true to the database’s definitions, its interpretation should be taken in light of this limitation.
References
Author Manuscript
1. Bodenheimer T. Uneasy alliance--clinical investigators and the pharmaceutical industry. N Engl J Med. 2000; 342:1539. [PubMed: 10816196] 2. Stensland KD, McBride RB, Latif A, et al. Adult cancer clinical trials that fail to complete: an epidemic? J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014; 106 3. Services, C. f. M. a. M. https://www.cms.gov/OpenPayments/Downloads/Teaching-HospitalList-2014-Open-Payments-Cycle-[October-2014].pdf
