Financial conflicts of interest between pharmaceutical companies and the authors of urology clinical practice guidelines in Japan.

introduction and hypothesisIn Japan, the authors of urology clinical practice guidelines (UCPG) used in patient-centered care are often targeted by pharmaceutical companies with financial payments. However, the financial relationship between UCPG authors and pharmaceutical companies remains unclear. This study aimed to determine the characteristics of industry payments to physicians that may influence recommendations in UCPG and to assess the transparency of payment disclosure.

methodsWe considered 193 UCPG authors receiving payments from 79 companies between 2016 and 2017 and the 13 UCPG published by the Japanese Urological Association between 2015 and 2018. We determined 2-year combined mean and median payments to authors, total company payments, and associations between author attributes and payment values using multivariate negative binomial regression. Also, we assessed the extent of the financial disclosure policies among the 13 UCPG.

resultsOverall, 171 (88.6%) authors received payments with a combined value of $6,169,333. Median and mean payments were $7147 (interquartile range, $1512-$44,807) and $31,965 (standard deviation, $51,684), respectively. University professors working on multiple UCPG with new drug approvals were associated with higher payments. Twelve (92.3%) UCPG failed to disclose financial conflicts.

conclusionsWhile it remains unclear whether financial entanglements improperly influence the contents of UCPG, most Japanese authors received substantial payments from pharmaceutical companies with little or no disclosure. Because insufficient transparency in disclosure of these financial entanglements may compromise the integrity of UCPG, more rigorous regulation and greater disclosure of financial conflicts of interest are needed.