Conflict of interest disclosure in oncology: preliminary insights from the Global ONCOTRUST-1 cross-sectional study

El Bairi, Khalid, Najem, Salma, Chowdhury, Arman Reza, Omar, Abeid, Abdihamid, Omar, Teuwen, Laure-Anne, Benhima, Nada, Madariaga, Ainhoa, Elkefi, Safa, Diaz, Fernando Cristobal, Hussain, Sadaqat, Jenei, Kristina, Hammad, Nazik, Mutebi, Miriam, Rubagumya, Fidel, Trapani, Dario, El Kadmiri, Nadia, Laouali, Nasser and Fourtassi, Maryam (2024) Conflict of interest disclosure in oncology: preliminary insights from the Global ONCOTRUST-1 cross-sectional study. JCO Global Oncology, 10. ISSN 2687-8941

Text (Jenei_conflict-of-interest-disclosure--published) - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (697kB)

• Author
• Scopus publication

Abstract

Purpose Conflicts of interest (COIs) between oncologists and industry might considerably influence how the presentation of the research results is delivered, ultimately affecting clinical decisions and policy-making. Although there are many regulations on reporting COI in high-income countries (HICs), little is known about their reporting in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Oncology Transparency Under Scrutiny and Tracking (ONCOTRUST-1) is a pilot global survey to explore the knowledge and perceptions of oncologists regarding COI. Materials and Methods We designed an online 27-question–based survey in the English language to explore the perceptions and knowledge of oncologists regarding COI, with an emphasis on LMICs. Descriptive statistics and the Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies guidelines were used to report the findings. Results ONCOTRUST-1 surveyed 200 oncologists, 70.9% of them practicing in LMICs. Median age of the respondents was 36 (range, 26-84) years; 47.5% of them were women. Of the respondents, 40.5% reported weekly visits by pharmaceutical representatives to their institutions. Regarding oncologists' perceptions of COI that require disclosure, direct financial benefits, such as honoraria, ranked highest (58.5%), followed by gifts from pharmaceutical representatives (50%) and travel grants for attending conferences (44.5%). By contrast, personal or institutional research funding, sample drugs, consulting or advisory board, expert testimony, and food and beverage funded by pharmaceutical industry were less frequently considered as COI. Moreover, only 24% of surveyed oncologists could correctly categorize all situations representing a COI. Conclusion These findings underscore the importance of clear guidelines, education, and transparency in reporting COI in oncology. This hypothesis-generating pilot survey provided the rationale for ONCOTRUST-2 study, which will compare perceptions of COI among oncologists in LMICs and HICs.

Item Type:	Article
Official URL:	https://ascopubs.org/journal/go
Additional Information:	© 2024 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
Divisions:	Health Policy
Subjects:	R Medicine > RA Public aspects of medicine
Date Deposited:	26 Jul 2024 11:21
Last Modified:	12 Dec 2024 04:24
URI:	http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/124379

Actions (login required)

View Item