Industry-academia relationship: The need to collaborate and disclose
The current economic crisis affects industry, but also academia, with decreasing federal funds available for medical research. Many of the brightest researchers create and invent novel approaches in academia. On the other hand, scientific discoveries by pharmaceutical, radiopharmaceutical and instrumentation companies frequently need to be tested and validated in collaboration with academia.
There are, of course, various levels of collaboration. Sizeable clinical trials of new drugs or imaging probes cannot be conducted without strong support and collaboration from industry. Such trials are either directly funded by industry or can, in some instances, be indirectly funded as is the case for the clinical trials network of the Society of Nuclear Medicine or the multicenter trial comparing 18F-NaF PET/CT vs. conventional 99Tc MDP bone imaging that is conducted by the Academy of Molecular Imaging. The level of financial compensation for participation in these trials varies from more symbolic to substantial.
A second level of interaction has emerged more recently whereby researchers in academia start or co-found companies to translate and transfer their inventions to the market place. This approach has several motivations. The first one would be that the inventors believe that their invention is important and useful and that it, therefore, should be made available to the public. This is a good reason since “translatability” is an increasingly recognized evaluation parameter even by federal granting agencies. A second important motivation is, without any doubt, financial. This motivation is and should be shared among academic institutions. Academic institutions that are strapped for funds should be highly interested in establishing substantial intellectual property income. Conversely, researchers who have increasing difficulties obtaining federal funds could gain considerable freedom and independence for their academic programs. Interactions between academia and industry do carry the risk of abuse, corruption and scientific misconduct. However, this risk also exists in federally funded research.
Many academic institutions have established conflict of interest policies that govern their interactions with industry. Some of these policies are reasonable, but others have become prohibitive by imposing numerous restrictions on researchers. National standards have yet to be established. Industry-academia relationships are not unethical; on the contrary, they are extremely important and necessary for bringing together the best and brightest minds in medical research.
The simple, common sense solution for the problem is honest disclosure of financial relationships to patients and institutions, and complete data transparency.
Johannes Czernin, MD
Professor, Molecular & Medical Pharmacology
Director, Nuclear Medicine Clinic, Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography
David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif.