The interaction between medical research and for-profit corporations is not new, but it has expanded considerably in recent years. Some of the recent trends may accelerate the research process, particularly when large clinical trials are required. However, a renewed commitment to the application of high ethical standards is essential to ensure that societal trust in research is not eroded, subjects enrolled in trials do not become merely a means to an end, and medical research is efficiently translated into clinical advances that will benefit future patients. This article focuses on the analysis of conflicts of interest in the conduct of clinical trials in both academic and community-based settings. Specifically, it discusses how the roles of research scientists and clinical practitioners differ and the importance of ensuring that participants' consent to enroll in clinical trials is not the result of confusion about the goals of an experimental treatment that may resemble clinical care. The article also discusses the potential conflicts of interest that can arise when clinicians stand to gain from enrolling their own patients as subjects in clinical trials and examines various instances in which disclosure of information regarding funding and compensation may serve to minimize such conflicts. This article emphasizes that to preserve the integrity of research and to protect the welfare of human subjects who enroll in trials, physicians should have adequate training in the conduct of research and be familiar with the ethics of research. When a physician has treated or continues to treat a patient who is eligible to enroll as a subject in a clinical trial conducted by the same physician, someone other than the treating physician should obtain the participant's informed consent. Finally, the article addresses disclosure of financial incentives and related funding issues.

Metoclopramide tablets were compared with placebo in the treatment of gastrointestinal symptoms in 40 patients with diabetic gastroparesis. Results of a 3-wk double-blind study indicate that metoclopramide at a dosage of one 10-mg tablet four times daily reduced nausea, vomiting, fullness, and early satiety and improved meal tolerance better than placebo. Statistically significant differences were noted for nausea and postprandial fullness. Mean gastric emptying assessed by radionuclide scintigraphy was significantly improved in the metoclopramide-treated group when compared with their baseline result. Metoclopramide is an effective agent for improving the upper gastrointestinal motor function in diabetic patients with gastroparesis.

Surgical placebo controls should be used only when no other trial design will yield the requisite data and should always be accompanied by a rigorous informed consent process and a careful consideration of the related risks and benefits. The recommended ethical guidelines were adopted as AMA ethics policy and are now incorporated in the AMA's Code of Medical Ethics.

SUMMARYPhysicians' relationships with industry derive from the moral imperative to advocate and work for the best interests of patients. Private industry generally operates to satisfy the best interests of the stockholders or owners. Conflicts arise between these interests and are magnified by the inequality of the financial positions of physicians and industry. Because the ultimate consumer of the products (drugs, medical devices, etc.) of the biomedical industry must enlist a physician as an intermediary, the physician has become the target of industry in a sophisticated marketing effort that includes the offering of financial and other incentives. These conflicts and incentives are pervasive throughout clinical and research endeavors. Standards for resolution, if not elimination, of these conflicts have been proposed by various respected organizations. Individual physicians and medical organizations should evaluate these standards and, if pertinent and appropriate, endorse and follow them.