Questioning a publication bias between industry-funded and non-industry-funded randomized controlled trials on biological and small molecule therapy for rheumatoid arthritis

Abstract

BackgroundThere has been a significant increase in financial support of clinical research by the pharmaceutical industry. MethodsWe performed a comprehensive systematic literature review to determine whether there is publication bias for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) studies between industry-funded and non-industry funded randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and between RCTs with positive results (PRs) and those with negative results (NRs) of FDAapproved biological and small molecule drug therapy for RA. Each RCT was classified as having either a PR or a NR, and as having received commercial funding or not. ResultsMost (297/349, 85.18%) of the RCTs were commercially funded. There was no significant difference in PRs or association with publication between commercially and noncommercially funded RCTs. Sample size was significantly larger in commercially funded RCTs and in those with PRs, and it was the only significant parameter that predicted publication in higher impact factor journals in the field of RA. ConclusionThere is no significant association between commercial funding and the publication of positive results or the publication of an RCT in higher impact factor journals.