Conflicts of interest in clinical practice: lessons learned from cardiovascular medicine
Daniele Ronco,Arthur M Albuquerque,Mateo Marin-Cuartas,Amedeo Anselmi,Rafael Sádaba,Fabio Barili,Miguel Sousa Uva,James M Brophy,Eduard Quintana,Francesco Musumeci,Jacques Tomasi,Jean-Philippe Verhoye,John Mandrola,Victor Dayan,Patrick O Myers,Ovidio A Garcia Villareal,Sanjay Kaul,Jorge Rodriguez-Roda Stuart,Milan Milojevic,Walter J Gomes,Alessandro Parolari,Rui M S Almeida,INTEGRITTY, and with the endorsement of the Latin American Association of Cardiac and Endovascular Surgery (LACES), the Latin European Alliance of Cardiovascular Surgical Societies (LEACSS), the Brazilian Society of Cardiovascular Surgery (BSCVS), the French Society of Thoracic and Cardio-Vascular Surgery (SFCTCV), the Italian Society for Cardiac Surgery (SICCH), the Mexican College of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, the Portuguese Society of Cardiac Thoracic and Vascular Surgery (SPCCTV) and the Spanish Cardiovascular and Endovascular Society (SECCE),Arthur Albuquerque,Rui Almeida,Sylvain Beurtheret,Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai,William Boden,Michael Borger,James Brophy,Gianpiero Buttiglione,Raffaele De Caterina,Manuela de la Cuesta,David Faxon,Michael Firstenberg,Ovidio Garcia-Villareal,Walter Gomes,Samuel Heuts,Michal Kawczynski,Mateo Marin Cuartas,Martin Misfeld,Eduardo Quintana,Rita Redberg,Rachel Riad,David Taggart,Tristan Yan,Marco Zenati
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezae296
2024-09-02
Abstract:Cardiovascular diseases represent a major burden worldwide, and clinical trials are critical to define treatment improvements. Since various conflicts of interest (COIs) may influence trials at multiple levels, cardiovascular research represents a paradigmatic example to analyze their effects and manage them effectively to re-establish the centrality of evidence-based medicine.Despite the manifest role of industry, COIs may differently affect both sponsored and non-sponsored studies in many ways. COIs influence may start from the research question, data collection and adjudication, up to result reporting, including the spin phenomenon. Outcomes and endpoints (especially composite) choice and definitions also represent potential sources for COIs interference. Since large randomized controlled trials significantly influence international guidelines, thus impacting also clinical practice, their critical assessment for COIs is mandatory. Despite specific protocols aimed to mitigate COI influence, even scientific societies and guideline panels may not be totally free from COIs, negatively affecting their accountability and trustworthiness.Shared rules, awareness of COI mechanisms and transparency with external data access may help promoting evidence-based research and mitigate COIs impact. Managing COIs effectively should preserve public trust in the cardiovascular profession without compromising the positive relationships between investigators and industry.