New Study finds only 6% of
drug advertising material is supported by evidence
BMJ 2004;328:485 (28 February)
Only 6% of drug advertising material is
supported by evidence
Heidelberg Annette Tuffs
A new study of the advertising material and
marketing brochures sent out by drug companies to GPs in Germany has shown that
about 94% of the information in them has no basis in scientific evidence.
The study, carried out by the Institute for
Evidence-Based Medicine, a private independent research institute in Cologne,
evaluated 175 brochures containing information on 520 drugs, which were either
sent by post or handed out to 43 GPs since last June. The study was published in
this month’s issue of the drugs bulletin Arznei Telegramm (2004;35:21-3;
www.di-em.de/data/at_2004_35_21.pdf ).
About 15% of the brochures did not contain
any citations, while the citations listed in another 22% could not be found. In
the remaining 63% the information was mostly correctly connected with the
relevant research articles but did not reflect their results. Only 6% of the
brochures contained statements that were scientifically supported by
identifiable literature.
The evaluation was done by two specially
trained and independently acting reviewers. In cases of doubt a third reviewer
was involved.
"This is the first study in Germany
evaluating the quality of drug advertising material," says Thomas Kaiser, a
scientist at the institute who published the study together with Peter Sawicki
and other colleagues.
He points out that the advertising material
presents distorted images of the drugs’ profiles. The article lists several
examples of misrepresentation: medical guidelines from scientific societies are
misquoted or changed, the side effects of drugs are minimised, groups of patient
are wrongly defined, study results are suppressed, treatment effects are
exaggerated, risks are manipulated, and effects of drugs were drawn from animal
studies.
The authors warn that such a high amount of
misinformation puts patients’ health at risk. Studies from other countries
have shown that doctors tend to base their decisions on the information and
advertising material sent out by drug companies. Therefore, the authors
conclude, an independent institution should be established to monitor the
content of such material.
The German drug industry has decided to
tighten the rules in its self regulatory code on relations between the industry
and the medical profession with regard to cooperation in clinical studies and
attendance at conferences that are funded by drug companies.
The German Association of Research Based
Pharmaceutical Companies in Berlin announced that its members have set up an
independent tribunal in Berlin. Members of the tribunal will be chosen by drug
companies and doctors’ and patients’ groups but will not be elected
representatives of those bodies. Like a court, the tribunal will be able to
punish companies that break the rules, imposing fines of up to €50 000 (£34
000; $63 000) or, in the case of a second offence, up to €250 000. Anyone will
be allowed to notify the tribunal of possible offences.
The initiative was the industry’s reaction
to the German government’s threat to install an executive against corruption.
Doctors’ associations have also tightened their rules on corruption.
More information about the Institute for
Evidence-Based Medicine can be found on its website, www.di-em.de/z_index.htm