In response to sustained public pressure, the National Institutes of Health is now getting set to tighten its oversight on grants awarded academic researchers, whose institutions are required to report any conflicts of interest. Recent examples uncovered by the Senate Finance Committee, however, have embarrassed the NIH and several universities, most notably Harvard University.

Over the past several months, the committee has disclosed instances where academic researchers at Harvard, Stanford University and the University of Cincinnatti accepted funding from both the NIH and various drugmakers, but failed to fully disclose industry payments. Universities are supposed to monitor researchers and the NIH is supposed to monitor the universities for conflicts involving payments exceeding $10,000 over a 12-month period. The failures underscored lax oversight.

Just three months ago, Norka Ruiz Bravo, the NIH deputy director for extramural research, told The New York Times that “for us to try to manage directly the conflict-of-interest of an NIH investigator would be not only inappropriate but pretty much impossible.” She added that “I think (the system) is working to the extent that people are being honest and I think most people are honest.”

In a June 20 letter to Chuck Grassley, the Republican Senator who spearheaded the investigation, Elias Zerhouni, the NIH director, offers a mea culpa. “The NIH has been undergoing a comprehensive review of our oversight of extramural institutions’ conflicts of interest. As a result of this intensive effort, the NIH has identified and is reviewing several areas for oversight enhancement.”

In response, Grassley today wrote the Senate and House Appropriations Committees to tighten regulations requiring the NIH to conduct stricter oversight.

“The monetary value and prestige of NIH grants is significant enough that the possibility of losing a grant for not complying with reporting requirements ought to be a strong incentive to follow the rules,” he says in a statement.