Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 1, 2025

A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition
Published on: September 20, 2019
Financial relationships between industry and principal investigators of US cooperative group randomized cancer
April L Metzger1, Adams Kusi Appiah2, Christopher M Wright3
1Department of Radiation Oncology, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Abstract:
Financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) could bias the potentially practice-changing oncologic randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of tomorrow. This investigation characterized the FCOIs of the principal investigators (PIs) of all currently accruing trials of the four (adult) cooperative groups of the National Clinical Trials Network. For our study, the PI list was first compiled, and each name was then searched in the CMS Open Payments database. For each transaction (general payments (GPs) or research funding (RF)), the amount/number/source of payments was recorded. Results showed that from 2014 to 2019, the 91 PIs collectively accepted nearly one-third of a billion dollars ($10 477 023 GPs and $320 096 233 RF). The mean and median GP was $6505 and $945, respectively, and $301 693 and $49 824 RF, respectively. Multivariable Gamma regression analysis revealed that higher GP sums were associated with RCTs involving any type of systemic therapy, and higher RF sums with medical oncologist PIs, trials with phase III components, and RCTs involving radiotherapy (P < .05 for all). Both higher-volume GPs and RF were predicted by PIs having accepted payment(s) from the manufacturer of the drug utilized in their RCT (P < .001 GP, P = .008 RF). Taken together, the main message of this investigation is that FCOIs may be particularly high in PIs of phase III systemic therapy trials, especially if the PI accepted payments from the manufacturer of the drug utilized in their trial. Such RCTs should be thoroughly scrutinized by medical journals, the FDA, and insurance companies for potential "industry bias" that could influence the integrity of their conclusions.
Insights
Financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) are prevalent among principal investigators (PIs) in oncology clinical trials. PIs accepted substantial payments, particularly those involved in systemic therapy trials, raising concerns about potential industry bias.
Area of Science:
- Oncology
- Clinical Trials
- Medical Ethics
Background:
- Financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) pose a risk to the integrity of clinical research.
- Understanding FCOIs in oncology is crucial for maintaining unbiased trial outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To characterize FCOIs among principal investigators (PIs) of National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) adult cooperative group trials.
- To identify factors associated with higher FCOI amounts in oncology randomized clinical trials (RCTs).
Main Methods:
- Compiled PI lists for NCTN adult cooperative group trials.
- Searched the CMS Open Payments database for general payments (GPs) and research funding (RF) from 2014-2019.
- Utilized multivariable Gamma regression to analyze associations between FCOIs and trial characteristics.
Main Results:
- 91 PIs accepted nearly one-third of a billion dollars in payments ($10.5M GPs, $320.1M RF).
- Higher GP sums correlated with systemic therapy trials; higher RF sums correlated with medical oncologists, phase III trials, and radiotherapy trials.
- PIs accepting payments from drug manufacturers involved in their RCTs had significantly higher FCOI volumes.
Conclusions:
- FCOIs are substantial among PIs of oncology RCTs, particularly in phase III systemic therapy trials.
- PIs receiving payments from manufacturers of drugs used in their trials exhibit higher FCOI levels.
- Oncology RCTs with high FCOIs warrant rigorous scrutiny by journals, regulatory bodies, and insurers to mitigate potential industry bias.
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials: Overview
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...
Bioavailability Study Design: Healthy Subjects Versus Patients
Bioequivalence studies: Biowaivers

