Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Urogynecology Journal
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal 1/2007

01-01-2007 | Special Contribution

Of porcupines and poodles—a joint challenge to industry and the profession

Author: Paul Hilton

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 1/2007

Login to get access

Excerpt

The original title of the presentation was ‘Our relationship with industry—slings and arrows of outrageous fortune’. This was chosen not in recognition of the multiplicity of tapes and devices developing within our speciality (slings and arrows), nor of the pecuniary influences of the pharmaceutical industry (outrageous fortune). More particularly, it was chosen in recognition of the venue of the meeting, Copenhagen; this summary is punctuated with some relevant lessons from Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Prince of Denmark:
To be or not to be, that is the question: whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against the sea of troubles, and, by opposing, end them.
Hamlet, act 3, scene i
…
Literature
1.
Wager E (2003) How to dance with porcupines: rules and guidelines on doctors’ relations with drug companies. BMJ 326:1196–1198PubMedCrossRef
2.
Lewis S, Baird P, Evans RG, Ghali WA, Wright CJ, Gibson E et al (2001) Dancing with the porcupine: rules for governing the university–industry relationship. CMAJ 165(6):783–785PubMed
3.
4.
Sigworth SK, Nettleman MD, Cohen GM (2001) Pharmaceutical branding of resident physicians. JAMA 286(9):1024–1025PubMedCrossRef
5.
Orlowski JP, Wateska L (1992) The effects of pharmaceutical firm enticements on physician prescribing patterns; there’s no such thing as a free lunch. Chest 102(1):270–273PubMedCrossRef
6.
Chren MM, Landefeld CS (1994) Physicians’ behavior and their interactions with drug companies: a controlled study of physicians who requested additions to a hospital drug formulary. JAMA 271(9):684–689PubMedCrossRef
7.
8.
Grande D, Volpp K (2003) Cost and quality of industry-sponsored meals for medical residents. JAMA 290(9):1150–1151PubMedCrossRef
9.
Mainous A, Hueston W, Rich E (1995) Patient perceptions of physician acceptance of gifts from the pharmaceutical industry. Arch Fam Med 4:335–339PubMedCrossRef
10.
Gibbons RV, Landry FJ, Blouch DL, Jones DL, Williams FK, Lucey CR et al (1998) A comparison of physicians’ and patients’ attitudes toward pharmaceutical industry gifts. J Gen Intern Med 13(3):151–154PubMedCrossRef
11.
Blake RL Jr, Early EK (1995) Patients’ attitudes about gifts to physicians from pharmaceutical companies. J Am Board Fam Pract 8(6):457–464PubMed
12.
13.
Kim SY, Millard RW, Nisbet P, Cox C, Caine ED (2004) Potential research participants’ views regarding researcher and institutional financial conflicts of interest. J Med Ethics 30(1):73–79PubMedCrossRef
14.
Wazana A (2000) Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: is a gift ever just a gift? JAMA 283(3):373–380PubMedCrossRef
15.
16.
Moynihan R (2003) Drug company sponsorship of education could be replaced at a fraction of its cost. BMJ 326(7400):1163PubMedCrossRef
17.
House of Commons Health Committee (2005) The influence of the pharmaceutical industry, HC 42–1. The Stationery Office, London
18.
Bacon F (1605) The advancement of learning. Henrie Tomes, London
19.
Smith A (1776) An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Methuen, London
20.
Kealey T (1996) The economic laws of scientific research. Macmillan, London
21.
Friedberg M, Saffran B, Stinson TJ, Nelson W, Bennett CL (1999) Evaluation of conflict of interest in economic analyses of new drugs used in oncology. JAMA 282(15):1453–1457PubMedCrossRef
22.
Stelfox HT, Chua G, O’Rourke K, Detsky AS (1998) Conflict of interest in the debate over calcium-channel antagonists. N Engl J Med 338(2):101–106PubMedCrossRef
23.
Clifford TJ, Barrowman NJ, Moher D (2002) Funding source, trial outcome and reporting quality: are they related? Results of a pilot study. BMC Health Serv Res 2(1):18PubMedCrossRef
24.
Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP (2003) Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA 289(4):454–465PubMedCrossRef
25.
Baker CB, Johnsrud MT, Crismon ML, Rosenheck RA, Woods SW (2003) Quantitative analysis of sponsorship bias in economic studies of antidepressants. Br J Psychiatry 183:498–506PubMedCrossRef
26.
Als-Nielsen B, Chen W, Gluud C, Kjaergard LL (2003) Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials: a reflection of treatment effect or adverse events? JAMA 290(7):921–928PubMedCrossRef
27.
Bhandari M, Busse JW, Jackowski D, Montori VM, Schunemann H, Sprague S et al (2004) Association between industry funding and statistically significant pro-industry findings in medical and surgical randomized trials. CMAJ 170(4):477–480PubMed
28.
Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O (2003) Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 326(7400):1167–1170PubMedCrossRef
29.
Andersen N (2006) Gunnar Lose vs. Yamanouchi. J Dan Med Assoc/Ugeskr Laeger 168(6):546
30.
Chapple CR, Martinez-Garcia R, Selvaggi L, Toozs-Hobson P, Warnack W, Drogendijk T et al (2005) A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of solifenacin succinate and extended release tolterodine at treating overactive bladder syndrome: results of the STAR trial. Eur Urol 48(3):464–470PubMed
31.
Wager E, Field EA, Grossman L (2003) Good publication practice for pharmaceutical companies. Curr Med Res Opin 19(3):149–154PubMedCrossRef
32.
Jacobs A, Wager E (2005) European Medical Writers Association (EMWA) guidelines on the role of medical writers in developing peer-reviewed publications. Curr Med Res Opin 21(2):317–322PubMedCrossRef
33.
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (2006) Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: writing and editing for biomedical publication. Latest update. Available from: http://​www.​icmje.​org
34.
Smith R (2005) Medical journals are an extension of the marketing arm of pharmaceutical companies. PLoS Med 2(5):e138PubMedCrossRef
35.
Horton R (2004) The dawn of McScience. N Y Rev Books 51(4):7–9
36.
Angell M (2004) The truth about drug companies: how they deceive us and what to do about it. Random House, New York
37.
Cho MK, Bero LA (1996) The quality of drug studies published in symposium proceedings. Ann Intern Med 124(5):485–489PubMed
38.
Rochon PA, Gurwitz JH, Cheung CM, Hayes JA, Chalmers TC (1994) Evaluating the quality of articles published in journal supplements compared with the quality of those published in the parent journal. JAMA 272(2):108–113PubMedCrossRef
39.
Supplement (2004) New developments in the management of female stress urinary incontinence. BJU Int 94(s1):1–38CrossRef
40.
Van McCrary S, Anderson CB, Jakovljevic J, Khan T, McCullough LB, Wray NP et al (2000) A national survey of policies on disclosure of conflicts of interest in biomedical research. N Engl J Med 343(22):1621–1626PubMedCrossRef
41.
Haivas I, Schroter S, Waechter F, Smith R (2004) Editors’ declaration of their own conflicts of interest. CMAJ 171(5):475–476PubMed
42.
43.
DiMasi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG (2003) The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs. J Health Econ 22(2):151–185PubMedCrossRef
44.
National Institute for Health Care Management (2002) Changing patterns of pharmaceutical innovation. The National Institute for Health Care Management Research and Educational Foundation, Washington DC
45.
Goozer M (2004) The $800 million pill: the truth behind the cost of new drugs. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA
46.
Ulmsten U, Petros P (1995) Intravaginal slingplasty (IVS): an ambulatory surgical procedure for treatment of female urinary incontinence. Scand J Urol Nephrol 29(1):75–82PubMedCrossRef
47.
Ulmsten U, Henriksson L, Johnson P, Varhos G (1996) An ambulatory surgical procedure under local anesthesia for treatment of female urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 7(2):81–85PubMedCrossRef
48.
Hilton P (2006) But will it work, doctor? Evidence-based surgery for stress incontinence. In: Hillard T (ed) New horizons in obstetrics and gynaecology (formerly the RCOG Yearbook of Obstetrics and Gynaecology). RCOG, London (in press)
49.
50.
51.
Moynihan R, Cassels A (2005) Seeling sickness: how drug companies are turning us all into patients. Allen and Unwin, Crows Nest, NSW
52.
Kassirer J (2005) On the take: how medicine’s complicity with big business can endanger your health. Oxford University Press, New York
53.
54.
55.
56.
Gunnell D, Saperia J, Ashby D (2005) Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and suicide in adults: meta-analysis of drug company data from placebo controlled, randomised controlled trials submitted to the MHRA’s safety review. BMJ 330(7488):385–388PubMedCrossRef
57.
Fergusson D, Doucette S, Glass KC, Shapiro S, Healy D, Hebert P et al (2005) Association between suicide attempts and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 330(7488):396–399PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Of porcupines and poodles—a joint challenge to industry and the profession
Author
Paul Hilton
Publication date
01-01-2007
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 1/2007
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-006-0218-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2007

International Urogynecology Journal 1/2007 Go to the issue

Review Article

Current and future trends in the management of overactive bladder

Case Report

Spontaneous extrusion of sacral nerve implant secondary to massive weight loss

Original article

Redo midurethral synthetic sling for female stress urinary incontinence

Original Article

Trans-obturator surgery for stress urinary incontinence: 1-year follow-up of a cohort of 52 women

Original Article

Impact of stress urinary incontinence and overactive bladder on micturition patterns and health-related quality of life

Original Article

Physical activity in women planning sacrocolpopexy