Research from the Center for Clinical Trials at Johns Hopkins finds troubling differences between publicly available information on medications and the information that pharmaceutical companies possess. The paper, made available online yesterday by the Public Library of Science in PLoS Medicine, examines information made available as a result of a lawsuit against Pfizer regarding gabapentin (Neurontin) and finds that articles published in 10 peer-reviewed journals were biased and misleading despite appearing to follow standard protocols.
Abstract and Editors’ Summary →
Vedula, S., Li, T., Dickersin, K. Differences in Reporting of Analyses in Internal Company Documents Versus Published Trial Reports: Comparisons in Industry-Sponsored Trials in Off-Label Uses of Gabapentin. PLoS Medicine. Online January 29, 2013
Of further interest:
Published clinical trials shown to be misleading (Science News)
Ha! Neurontin, the psychiatric fad drug of 2005-2008. Psychiatrists were prescribing this miracle pill for everything based on this so-excellent “evidence.”
Report comment