Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Conflicts of interest in clinical practice: lessons learned from cardiovascular medicine

  • Daniele Ronco
  • , Arthur M. Albuquerque
  • , on behalf of INTEGRITTY (INTernational Evidence Grading Research Initiative Targeting Transparency and qualitY)
  • , 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
*Corresponding author for this work
  • Asst Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda
  • IRCCS Policlinico San Donato
  • Maastricht University
  • Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
  • Fresenius AG
  • CHU de Rennes
  • Hospital Universitario de Navarra
  • University of Milan
  • IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi - Milano
  • Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
  • Santa Cruz Hospital
  • University of Porto
  • McGill University Health Centre
  • University of Barcelona
  • IRCCS Istituto Mediterraneo per i Trapianti e Terapie ad Alta Specializzazione (ISMETT) - Palermo
  • Baptist Health Louisville
  • Universidad de la República
  • University Hospital Lausanne
  • Mexican College of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery
  • Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
  • Hospital Ramon y Cajal
  • Dedinje Cardiovascular Institute
  • Universidade Federal de São Paulo
  • Centro Universitário Fundação Assis Gurgacz
  • Universidade Estadual do Oeste do Paraná
  • Faculdades Pequeno Príncipe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)
33 Downloads (Pure)

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.

Original languageEnglish
Article numberezae296
JournalEuropean Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery
Volume66
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sept 2024

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Conflicts of interest in clinical practice: lessons learned from cardiovascular medicine'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this