{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Pharmaceutical company funding of cancer patient advocacy organizations in the Netherlands.
{Author}: Somers AMJ;Duits AJ;Samson MJ;Schnog JB;
{Journal}: J Cancer Policy
{Volume}: 41
{Issue}: 0
{Year}: 2024 Jun 12
暂无{DOI}: 10.1016/j.jcpo.2024.100493
{Abstract}: <B>BACKGROUND: </B>Financial conflicts of interest (FCOI) of medical professionals and associated organizations with pharmaceutical companies (pharma) might contribute to the use of low value oncological treatments. Value criteria for oncological drug approvals in the Netherlands have recently become more stringent leading to objections by cancer patient advocacy organizations (cPAOs). Considering the importance of cPAOs input in cancer patient care we analyzed whether pharma funding of cPAOs occurs in the Netherlands.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>The cPAO websites and available annual reports were evaluated for disclosure of pharma funding for the years 2021 and 2022. Also, data from the Dutch Healthcare Transparency Registry (DHTR) were extracted.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>Twenty-one of 34 (61.8 %) cPAOs received pharma funding (with 20 registered in the DHTR), and for 13 (29.4 %) cPAOs no reporting of pharma funding could be found. Three of the cPAOs disclosed pharma funding directly on their main website. Online educational material was available from 22 cPAOs on their websites with pharma funding disclosed on the educational material in 5. The total registered amount of pharmaceutical funding was €667,232.00 in 2021 and €536,098.00 in 2022. The median (and interquartile ranges) DHTR registered amount of support per cPAO that received funding in the studied period was €23,799.50 (14,823.75-84,663.30). The most common funding category as defined in the DHTR was project sponsorship.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>Financial support by the pharmaceutical industry is common for Dutch cPAOs. Given the importance of cPAOs and their objective input in the societal debate on the availability of cancer drugs, the potential influence of pharma sponsoring should be critically evaluated.