GS4 · 20 marks · 250 words

Dr. A.K. Singh, a professor of medicine, is a prominent cardiologist. His personal financial investments include significant stock holdings in three publicly traded biotechnology firms. He is approached by one of these firms to be a lead investigator in a therapeutic trial of a novel agent for preventing tissue damage from myocardial infarction (MI). This will be a randomized double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial (neither patient nor physician will know whether the drug under investigation or a placebo is being used in a given patient). Dr. Singh is quite familiar with the preliminary animal and cell biology work in the area and believes that there is an excellent chance that this new drug will result in a significant improvement in survival and reduce damage to the heart muscle. He even thinks this novel agent may reduce the risk of heart failure and irregular beats. Dr. Singh's group is one of the few cardiology groups fully prepared to carry out this investigation, which is why he was contacted. He cares for a large number of patients with MI and believes that he could enroll numerous patients efficiently. The drug will only be available to his patients if his group participates in the trial. The company is offering Rs. 25 lakh for each patient enrolled. As a lead investigator, he will become much better known and will likely experience an increase in referrals if the trial succeeds. 1. Is Dr. Singh's participation in this study appropriate? Justify your position. 2. Does Dr. Singh have a conflict of interest? If so, what is the nature of the conflict? How could it be mitigated. 3. How would the nature of the conflict of interest be different had he not already owned stock, but instead had been offered stock as a form of compensation for conducting the study?

Answered by 3 toppers · CSE 2016–2018

Syllabus: Case Studies on above issues.

How toppers approached it

From 2 of the 3 answers · about 360 words.

Opening

  • No separate opening2 of 2

Body

  • Points and prose1 of 2
  • Points1 of 2

Close

  • A summary1 of 2
  • A way forward1 of 2

The toppers’ answers

Sudhir KumarAIR 42 · CSE 2017 · 333 wordsTheir whole copy

Opening

The present case deals with issue of being responsible when dealing with public. Dr. A.K Singh is a reputed cardiologist, dealing with huge number of patients who trust him.

Body · points

  1. Dr. Singh's participation in this study is not appropriate because this experiment is blinded clinical trial, where patient is given the novel agent without his consent.

The issue of consent and making patients aware about its possible backlash is prominent. Dr. A.K Singh's participation would be wrong on many counts like misusing his participation in stock holding for minting money. The provision of 25 lakhs per patient enrolled is biggest fault. Had the case been of voluntary participation, it would have been fine.

  1. Dr. A.K Singh has conflict of interest in this case. He is stockholder in the biotechnology firm which has approached him to lead the trial. Thus his allegiance and benefit in company stands in conflict with provision of welfare of patients and the trust. Also the provision of 25 lakh and increased referrals brings conflict of interest.

It could be mitigated easily had the patients been consulted and given a full brief about it. There should be no monetary provision as it is an inducement for poors.

  1. If he had been offered stock as compensation for conducting the study, the nature of wrong would have become more grave because then it would be a direct case of monetary inducement for forged patients trials.

Close · a way forward

The technology firm is conducting trial with future benefits in mind. It is not interested in any public welfare. It wants to become a monopoly in the new sphere of drugs treatment. Thus, it would do everything to induce people like A.K Singh.

This calls for stringent regulation of clinical trials and more ethical approach from doctors. Firstly, A.K Singh must refrain from conducting trial as he has share in the company. Even if he agrees, there must be full transparency and blinded trials must not be followed. It is about public health and safety.

More on Conflict of Interest

A private interest bearing on a public duty, and the disclosure or recusal that answers it.

All GS4 questions on Conflict of Interest