Prominent clinical guidelines fall short of conflict of interest standards

Two recent clinical practice guidelines – one for cholesterol management and another for treatment of chronic hepatitis C – did not meet the Institute of Medicine’s standards for limiting commercial conflicts of interest, according to results of a new analysis.

In research published online Jan. 17, Akilah A. Jefferson, MD, and Steven D. Pearson, MD, both of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md., re-examined conflict of interest disclosures for the 2013 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association cholesterol management guideline, as well as for the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and Infectious Diseases Society of America’s joint 2014 guideline related to novel drug treatments for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

The IOM standards for conflicts of interest in guidelines, introduced in 2011, require that less than half the members of any guideline writing committee have a commercial conflict, which can include consultancies, board memberships, and stock in manufacturers of devices or treatments. Guideline writing committee chairs and cochairs should have no commercial conflicts of interest, according to the IOM.

For the cholesterol guidelines, the investigators found that while the committee members fell below the threshold with only 44% reporting commercial conflicts, one writing chair had multiple conflicts until about 1 year before guideline development began, an analysis of concurrent publications suggested. For the HCV guidelines, meanwhile, 72% of the committee members reported commercial conflicts, along with four out of six committee cochairs. An analysis of concurrent publications revealed incomplete disclosure of conflicts among authors of both guidelines (JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Jan 17. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8439).

“Management of levels of commercial [conflict of interest] among guideline committees remains an important problem 5 years after the IOM standards were published,” the investigators wrote. They recommended “broader and more explicit adoption” of the IOM’s framework for conflict of interest.

The study notes that the HCV guideline met all nine of the additional IOM guideline development and evidence standards, while the cholesterol guideline met five of those standards.

The study was funded by an NIH grant. Dr. Pearson reported receiving research funding from foundations and membership dues paid by insurance and pharmaceutical companies. No other disclosures were reported.

Two recent clinical practice guidelines – one for cholesterol management and another for treatment of chronic hepatitis C – did not meet the Institute of Medicine’s standards for limiting commercial conflicts of interest, according to results of a new analysis.

In research published online Jan. 17, Akilah A. Jefferson, MD, and Steven D. Pearson, MD, both of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md., re-examined conflict of interest disclosures for the 2013 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association cholesterol management guideline, as well as for the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and Infectious Diseases Society of America’s joint 2014 guideline related to novel drug treatments for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

The IOM standards for conflicts of interest in guidelines, introduced in 2011, require that less than half the members of any guideline writing committee have a commercial conflict, which can include consultancies, board memberships, and stock in manufacturers of devices or treatments. Guideline writing committee chairs and cochairs should have no commercial conflicts of interest, according to the IOM.

For the cholesterol guidelines, the investigators found that while the committee members fell below the threshold with only 44% reporting commercial conflicts, one writing chair had multiple conflicts until about 1 year before guideline development began, an analysis of concurrent publications suggested. For the HCV guidelines, meanwhile, 72% of the committee members reported commercial conflicts, along with four out of six committee cochairs. An analysis of concurrent publications revealed incomplete disclosure of conflicts among authors of both guidelines (JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Jan 17. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8439).

“Management of levels of commercial [conflict of interest] among guideline committees remains an important problem 5 years after the IOM standards were published,” the investigators wrote. They recommended “broader and more explicit adoption” of the IOM’s framework for conflict of interest.

The study notes that the HCV guideline met all nine of the additional IOM guideline development and evidence standards, while the cholesterol guideline met five of those standards.

The study was funded by an NIH grant. Dr. Pearson reported receiving research funding from foundations and membership dues paid by insurance and pharmaceutical companies. No other disclosures were reported.

Two recent clinical practice guidelines – one for cholesterol management and another for treatment of chronic hepatitis C – did not meet the Institute of Medicine’s standards for limiting commercial conflicts of interest, according to results of a new analysis.

In research published online Jan. 17, Akilah A. Jefferson, MD, and Steven D. Pearson, MD, both of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md., re-examined conflict of interest disclosures for the 2013 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association cholesterol management guideline, as well as for the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and Infectious Diseases Society of America’s joint 2014 guideline related to novel drug treatments for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

The IOM standards for conflicts of interest in guidelines, introduced in 2011, require that less than half the members of any guideline writing committee have a commercial conflict, which can include consultancies, board memberships, and stock in manufacturers of devices or treatments. Guideline writing committee chairs and cochairs should have no commercial conflicts of interest, according to the IOM.

For the cholesterol guidelines, the investigators found that while the committee members fell below the threshold with only 44% reporting commercial conflicts, one writing chair had multiple conflicts until about 1 year before guideline development began, an analysis of concurrent publications suggested. For the HCV guidelines, meanwhile, 72% of the committee members reported commercial conflicts, along with four out of six committee cochairs. An analysis of concurrent publications revealed incomplete disclosure of conflicts among authors of both guidelines (JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Jan 17. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8439).

“Management of levels of commercial [conflict of interest] among guideline committees remains an important problem 5 years after the IOM standards were published,” the investigators wrote. They recommended “broader and more explicit adoption” of the IOM’s framework for conflict of interest.

The study notes that the HCV guideline met all nine of the additional IOM guideline development and evidence standards, while the cholesterol guideline met five of those standards.

The study was funded by an NIH grant. Dr. Pearson reported receiving research funding from foundations and membership dues paid by insurance and pharmaceutical companies. No other disclosures were reported.