Financial Relationships Between Pharmaceutical Companies and Rheumatologists in Japan Between 2016 and 2019.

BACKGROUNDS: Given the increasing number of novel and expensive drugs for rheumatoid diseases, the financial relationships between pharmaceutical companies and rheumatologists could be prevalent and substantial. However, little was known about the information in Japan. METHODS: Using payment data publicly disclosed by 92 major pharmaceutical companies, we evaluated the financial relationships between pharmaceutical companies and rheumatologists who were board certified by the Japan College of Rheumatology between 2016 and 2019. The trends in payments were estimated by the generalized estimating equations with 4-year payment data. Differences in payments between general and leading rheumatologists including the board members, clinical practice guideline authors, and medical journal editors were assessed. RESULTS: Of the board-certified rheumatologists, 70.7% (3563 of 5038) received a total of $55,246,485 in personal payments for lecturing, writing, and consulting from 79 pharmaceutical companies between 2016 and 2019. The median payments per rheumatologist receiving payments were $3447 (interquartile range, $1124-$11,974) in payment amounts. There were increasing trends in the payments per rheumatologist and the number of rheumatologists with payments, with average yearly change rates of 5.9% (95% confidence interval, 3.9%-7.9%; p < 0.001) and 1.2% (95% CI, 0.3%-2.0%; p = 0.008). The leading rheumatologists such as the society board members, clinical practice guideline authors, and medical journal editors received much more payments than other rheumatologists. CONCLUSION: Most rheumatologists increasingly received personal payments for lecturing, consulting, and writing reimbursements from pharmaceutical companies in Japan. These payments were significantly concentrated on rheumatologists in authoritative and influential positions.

Observational study of financial and non-financial conflicts of interest among the Japanese government advisory board members concerning coronavirus disease 2019.

This cross-sectional analysis aimed to assess the extent of conflicts of interest among the Japanese government coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) advisory board members and elucidate the accuracy of conflicts of interest (COI) disclosure and management strategies. Using the payment data from all 79 pharmaceutical companies in Japan between 2017 and 2019 and direct research grants from the Japanese government between 2019 and 2020, we evaluated the extent of financial and non-financial COI among all 20 Japanese government COVID-19 advisory board members. The Ethic Committee of the Medical Governance Research Institute approved this study. Japanese government COVID-19 advisory board members were predominantly male (75.0%) and physicians (50.0%). Between 2019 and 2020, 2 members (10.0%) received a total of $819,244 in government research funding. Another 5 members (25.0%) received $532,127 in payments, including $276,722 in personal fees, from 31 pharmaceutical companies between 2017 and 2019. The average value of the pharmaceutical payments was $9155 (standard deviation: $12,975). Furthermore, neither the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare nor the Japanese Cabinet Secretariat disclosed financial or non-financial COI with industry. Additionally, the government had no policies for managing COI among advisory board members. This study found that the Japanese government COVID-19 advisory board had financial and non-financial COI with pharmaceutical companies and the government. Furthermore, personal communication received as part of this research indicated that there were no rigorous COI management strategies for the COVID-19 advisory board members. Any government must ensure the independence of scientific advisory boards by implementing more rigorous and transparent management strategies that require the declaration and public disclosure of all COI.

Evaluation of Financial and Nonfinancial Conflicts of Interest and Quality of Evidence Underlying Psoriatic Arthritis Clinical Practice Guidelines: Analysis of Personal Payments From Pharmaceutical Companies and Authors' Self-Citation Rate in Japan and the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To assess financial conflicts of interest (COI) and nonfinancial COI among psoriatic arthritis (PsA) clinical practice guideline (CPG) authors in Japan and the US, and to evaluate the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations of PsA CPGs. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis using payment data from major Japanese pharmaceutical companies and the US Open Payments Database from 2016 to 2018. All authors of PsA CPGs issued by the Japanese Dermatological Association (JDA) and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) were included. RESULTS: Of 23 CPG authors in Japan, 21 (91.3%) received at least 1 payment, with a combined total of $3,335,413 between 2016 and 2018. Regarding 25 US authors, 21 (84.0%) received at least 1 payment, with a combined total of $4,081,629 during the same period. The 3-year combined mean ± SD payment per author was $145,018 ± $114,302 in Japan and $162,825 ± $259,670 in the US. A total of 18 authors (78.3%) of the JDA PsA CPG and 12 authors (48.0%) of the ACR PsA CPG had undisclosed financial COI worth $474,663 and $218,501, respectively. The percentage of citations with at least 1 CPG author relative to total citations was 3.4% in Japan and 33.6% in the US. In sum, 71.4% and 88.8% of recommendations for PsA in the JDA and ACR were supported by low or very low quality of evidence. CONCLUSION: More rigorous cross-checking of information disclosed by pharmaceutical companies and self-reported by physicians and more stringent and transparent COI policies are necessary.

Nature and Trends in Personal Payments Made to the Respiratory Physicians by Pharmaceutical Companies in Japan between 2016 and 2019.

BACKGROUND: Financial relationships between healthcare professionals and pharmaceutical companies have historically caused conflicts of interest and unduly influenced patient care. However, little was known about such relationship and its effect in clinical practice among specialists in respiratory medicine. METHODS: Based on the retrospective analysis of payment data made available by all 92 pharmaceutical companies in Japan, this study evaluated the magnitude and trend of financial relationships between all board-certified Japanese respiratory specialists and pharmaceutical companies between 2016 and 2019. Magnitude and prevalence of payments for specialists were analyzed descriptively. The payment trends were assessed using the generalized estimating equations for the payment per specialist and the number of specialists with payments. RESULTS: Among all 7,114 respiratory specialists certified as of August 2021, 4,413 (62.0%) received a total of USD 53,547,391 and 74,195 counts from 72 (78.3%) pharmaceutical companies between 2016 and 2019. The median (interquartile range) 4-year combined payment values per specialist were USD 2,210 (USD 715-8,178). At maximum, one specialist received USD 495,332 personal payments over the 4 years. Both payments per specialist and number of specialists with payments significantly increased during the 4-year period, with 7.8% (95% CI: 5.5-9.8; p < 0.001) in payments and 1.5% (95% CI: 0.61-2.4; p = 0.001) in number of specialists with payments, respectively. CONCLUSION: The majority of respiratory specialists had increasingly received more personal payments from pharmaceutical companies for the reimbursement of lecturing, consulting, and writing between 2016 and 2019. These increasing financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies might cause conflicts of interest among respiratory physicians.

Pharmaceutical Payments to Japanese Board-Certified Infectious Disease Specialists: A Four-Year Retrospective Analysis of Payments from 92 Pharmaceutical Companies between 2016 and 2019.

BACKGROUNDS: Conflict of interest with pharmaceutical companies is one of the most concerned issues in infectious diseases. However, there is a lack of whole picture of detailed payments in Japan. METHODS: This retrospective study assessed financial relationships between pharmaceutical companies and all infectious disease specialists board-certified by the Japanese Association for Infectious Disease, using publicly disclosed payment data from 92 major pharmaceutical companies. Descriptive analyses were conducted for the payments. Payment trends were examined by the generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Of 1614 board-certified infection disease specialists, 1055 (65.4%) received a total of $17,784,070 payments, corresponding to 21,680 contracts between 2016 and 2019. The mean ± SD and median (interquartile range: IQR) were $16,857 ± $45,010 and $3183 ($938-$11,250) in payments. All board executive members of Japanese Association of Infectious Disease received higher payments averaging $163,792. There were no significant changes in payments per specialist (annual change rate: -1.4% [95% CI: -4.7-2.3%], p = 0.48) and prevalence of specialists with payments (annual change rate: -1.4% [95% CI: -3.1-0.2%], p = 0.093) over the four years. CONCLUSION: There were substantial financial relationships between pharmaceutical companies and board-certified infectious disease specialists in Japan. Furthermore, high ranked specialists such as those in the executive board had stronger financial ties with the companies.