Why is that some people think conflicts of interest don’t apply to them?

Take Carolyn Aldige of the Cancer Research and Prevention Foundation. In September 2005, she told an FDA advisory committee that she had no financial ties to OSI Pharmaceuticals, which makes Tarceva, and spoke in favor of the cancer drug. But now she acknowledges that her group received funding from OSI and its Tarceva marketing partner, Genentech.

“I do want to mention I have absolutely no financial connection with either of the sponsors, either of the companies that sponsor these drugs, and I paid my own way to be here, even though the gas was pretty expensive,” Aldige told the FDA panel, according to a transcript.

When questioned, Aldige says OSI began contributing to her Alexandria, Va., foundation four years ago. She said she didn’t think a request from the panel chairwoman that speakers reveal financial ties to drug companies applied to OSI’s contributions. OSI has given her foundation “$35,000 to $75,000 each year” in educational grants and contributions. The group’s 2006 annual report states it received at least $75,000 in “lifetime” contributions from OSI.

“I do not see it as a conflict,” Aldige said. “I think pancreatic cancer patients have so little. These patients have absolutely no hope.”

In fact, Aldige was one of three advocacy group heads who urged the FDA to approve Tarceva - a drug already approved for lung cancer - to help fight pancreatic cancer. OSI has contributed to all three advocacy groups, but only one disclosed the financial tie.

“The disclosure issue seems to be a no-brainer,” says Tom Murray, president of The Hastings Center, a bioethics research institute. “If you (representatives of advocacy groups) are drawing a salary from an organization that draws a significant amount of dollars from a company that has an interest in a drug, you should disclose it.”

Here’s the problem: the FDA asks speakers at public hearings to reveal ties to drug companies, but it has no authority to compel disclosure. This may not be easily remedied. Even if the FDA is granted authority, someone may still lie.

So here’s the sad, unfortunate lesson: patient advocacy groups may very well do good and necessary work on behalf of patients. But they don’t deserve a pass when it comes to funding. If these groups really want to maintain a wholesome image, then they should disclose all financial ties and not argue or play dumb. A tin ear doesn’t go very far in this world.

What works? Transparency. It’s that simple.

Full story in Newsday.

Hat tip to Insider.

[tags]Carolyn Aldige, Conflicts Of Interest, Non-Profit Groups, OSI Pharmaceuticals[/tags]