Health Canada committees risk financial conflicts of interest: 91勛圖 expert
Health Canada supplements its in-house expertise on prescription drug therapy and policy through the use of .
These committees and panels provide Health Canada with recommendations such as adding a statement about disabling and potentially irreversible adverse reactions to information about fluoroquinolones (a widely used class of antibiotics) or putting a warning sticker on prescriptions for opioids to highlight the risk of physical dependence, addiction and overdose.
Typically, people who sit on these committees and panels are experts in their field, although there are also representatives from drug companies and consumers. Those who are interested fill out an listing their qualifications and expertise, and Health Canada chooses members from this list. Potential members then need to disclosing any direct and indirect financial interests.
A direct financial interest includes current employment, investments in companies, partnerships, equity, royalties and a variety of other monetary relationships with a drug company. Indirect interests are things like consulting for a company, receiving personal educational grants, gifts or research funding.
I have just in which I look at the extent of these financial interests in the 81 different individuals who sit on the 11 active committees and panels. Only a small minority have a direct financial interest, but 56 have an indirect interest and those with indirect interests were present on all 11 committees and panels.
In fact, six of the 11 committees had a majority of members with a direct or indirect financial interest. One chair had a direct financial interest and eight others had an indirect financial interest.
Troubling lack of information
The key question is whether those financial interests bias the advice that the committees and panels offer to Health Canada.
Unfortunately, my research cannot answer that question because Health Canada doesnt release enough information. We dont know the names of the companies that committee and panel members have a relationship with, how much money they receive from the companies or when they received it. Crucially, we dont know how individuals voted on matters they were asked to consider.
This lack of information is troubling. Even the receipt of small amounts of money or the equivalent can affect behaviour. Meals valued at less than US$20 are associated with made by the companies providing the meals.
of people serving on U.S. Food and Drug Administration advisory committees shows that members who have financial ties solely to the firm sponsoring a drug are more likely to vote in ways favourable to the sponsor. Similarly, the research shows that those who serve on advisory boards for sponsoring firms show particularly strong prosponsor bias.
Importantly, conflict of interest declarations and waivers are publicly available on the FDA website. Financial conflict of interest is reported in dollar ranges (for example, $0-5,000, $5001-$10,000) and the way that individuals vote is recorded and made public.
Canadians need unbiased advice
Conflicts of interest among people who produce guidelines for doctors are considered such a serious problem that the recommends that the chair of any panel should be free of all conflicts, as should the majority of members on the panel.
Neither of these conditions are met by Health Canadas current policies.
Health Canada should follow the Institute of Medicine recommendations when constituting its committees and panels. It should also publicly release all of the information about direct and indirect financial interests that it collects.
Finally, Health Canada should record the votes of individual committee and panel members and provide a transcript of meetings so that everyone can see whether voting patterns are linked to different types of financial interests with particular companies.
The advice that these committees and panels gives to Health Canada can be key to ensuring that Canadians get the best possible value out of prescription drugs. It not only needs to be unbiased, it needs to be seen to be unbiased.
is an associate professor in the department of family and community medicine at the , a professor emeritus of health policy and management at York University and an emergency physician at University Health Network.
This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .