• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

评估欧洲癌症患者群体与制药公司之间关系的利益相关者意见。

Assessing stakeholder opinion on relations between cancer patient groups and pharmaceutical companies in Europe.

机构信息

Novartis Oncology Region Europe, Origgio, Italy.

出版信息

Patient. 2012;5(2):127-39. doi: 10.2165/11589210-000000000-00000.

DOI:10.2165/11589210-000000000-00000
PMID:22299759
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The relationship between the pharmaceutical industry and cancer patient groups has been the subject of much scrutiny and skepticism, and some high-profile negative media coverage has focused attention on some of the problematic aspects of the relationship. Both the pharmaceutical industry and cancer patient groups have made an effort in recent years to improve the transparency and openness of their relations, specifically with regard to the financial support offered by pharmaceutical companies to patient groups.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this survey were to benchmark perceptions held by different stakeholder groups about current relationships between cancer patient groups and pharmaceutical companies in Europe, and to explore opinions about ways in which partnerships between patient groups and pharmaceutical companies could evolve to the benefit of cancer patients.

METHODS

The survey was conducted using a structured questionnaire that contained a combination of matrix, scaled, and open-ended questions. The questionnaire was developed based on a literature search and the findings from ten in-depth interviews conducted with policy makers and advocates working at an EU level. Telephone interviews were carried out using a structured questionnaire with a convenience sample of 161 policy makers, cancer healthcare group representatives, and cancer patient group leaders from France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, and the UK. The interviews took place in the relevant language of the country.

RESULTS

The current relationship between the pharmaceutical industry and cancer patient groups in Europe is generally viewed as positive, but it is also viewed as being unequal, not transparent enough, and not sufficiently patient-centric. There is broad agreement that cancer patient groups can help companies identify unmet needs and contribute to the development of innovative medicines; however, there is some concern about cancer patients' competence to take on this role. Also, pharmaceutical companies and patient groups have a common interest in working together on the development of non-promotional patient information and strategies to support medicines adherence. Respondents also indicated that the two sectors have a legitimate interest in ensuring that patients in need access appropriate treatments in a timely manner. Ongoing cooperation between health professionals, pharmaceutical companies, and cancer patient groups is also viewed as important. Efforts should continue to make relations between pharmaceutical companies and cancer patient groups as equal, open, and transparent as possible.

CONCLUSION

Despite ongoing concerns about the openness and transparency of relations between pharmaceutical companies and patient groups, there is scope for these two sectors to work together on issues of common interest.

摘要

背景

制药行业与癌症患者群体之间的关系一直备受关注和质疑,一些备受瞩目的负面媒体报道也将焦点集中在这种关系中存在的一些问题上。近年来,制药行业和癌症患者群体都在努力提高双方关系的透明度和开放性,特别是制药公司向患者群体提供的财务支持方面。

目的

本调查旨在对不同利益相关者群体对欧洲癌症患者群体与制药公司当前关系的看法进行基准测试,并探讨如何改善制药公司与患者群体之间的伙伴关系,从而使癌症患者受益。

方法

本研究采用了一种结构化问卷进行调查,问卷中包含矩阵、量表和开放式问题。问卷的开发基于文献检索和对在欧盟层面开展工作的政策制定者和倡导者进行的十次深入访谈的结果。采用结构化问卷,对来自法国、德国、匈牙利、意大利、拉脱维亚、荷兰、波兰、葡萄牙、罗马尼亚、西班牙、瑞典和英国的 161 名政策制定者、癌症医疗保健团体代表和癌症患者群体领导人进行了便利抽样的电话访谈。访谈以相关国家的语言进行。

结果

欧洲制药行业与癌症患者群体之间的当前关系总体上被认为是积极的,但也被认为是不平等的、不够透明的,并且不够以患者为中心。人们普遍认为,癌症患者群体可以帮助公司确定未满足的需求,并为创新药物的开发做出贡献;然而,人们对癌症患者承担这一角色的能力存在一些担忧。此外,制药公司和患者群体在共同努力开发非促销性患者信息以及支持药物依从性的策略方面具有共同利益。受访者还表示,这两个部门有合法利益确保有需要的患者能够及时获得适当的治疗。卫生专业人员、制药公司和癌症患者群体之间持续的合作也被认为是重要的。应继续努力使制药公司与癌症患者群体之间的关系尽可能平等、开放和透明。

结论

尽管人们对制药公司与患者群体关系的开放性和透明度持续存在担忧,但这两个部门在共同关心的问题上仍有合作的空间。

相似文献

1
Assessing stakeholder opinion on relations between cancer patient groups and pharmaceutical companies in Europe.评估欧洲癌症患者群体与制药公司之间关系的利益相关者意见。
Patient. 2012;5(2):127-39. doi: 10.2165/11589210-000000000-00000.
2
"Asset exchange"-interactions between patient groups and pharmaceutical industry: Australian qualitative study.“资产交换”-患者群体与制药行业的互动:澳大利亚定性研究。
BMJ. 2019 Dec 12;367:l6694. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l6694.
3
Pharmaceutical Industry Support of US Patient Advocacy Organizations: An International Context.制药行业对美国患者倡导组织的支持:国际背景。
Am J Public Health. 2019 Apr;109(4):559-561. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304946. Epub 2019 Feb 21.
4
[Transparency in relations between multinational R&D pharmaceutical companies' corporate social responsibility activities and patient organizations in the Europe, Japan, and the United States].[跨国研发制药公司的企业社会责任活动与欧洲、日本和美国患者组织之间关系的透明度]
Nihon Koshu Eisei Zasshi. 2019;66(12):746-755. doi: 10.11236/jph.66.12_746.
5
Sunshine Policies and Murky Shadows in Europe: Disclosure of Pharmaceutical Industry Payments to Health Professionals in Nine European Countries.欧洲的阳光政策与阴暗面:九个欧洲国家向卫生专业人员披露制药业付款情况。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2018 Jun 1;7(6):504-509. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2018.20.
6
Patient Advocacy Organizations, Industry Funding, and Conflicts of Interest.患者倡导组织、行业资助与利益冲突。
JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Mar 1;177(3):344-350. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.8443.
7
What do pharmaceutical industry professionals in Europe believe about involving patients and the public in research and development of medicines? A qualitative interview study.欧洲制药行业专业人士对于让患者和公众参与药物研发持怎样的看法?一项定性访谈研究。
BMJ Open. 2016 Jan 7;6(1):e008928. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008928.
8
[Early achievements of the Danish pharmaceutical industry--8. Lundbeck].[丹麦制药行业的早期成就——8. 灵北公司]
Theriaca. 2016(43):9-61.
9
Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.德国药品效益评估的程序和方法。
Eur J Health Econ. 2008 Nov;9 Suppl 1:5-29. doi: 10.1007/s10198-008-0122-5.
10
Transparent collaboration between industry and academia can serve unmet patient need and contribute to reproductive public health.透明的产学合作可以满足未满足的患者需求,并有助于生殖公共卫生。
Hum Reprod. 2017 Aug 1;32(8):1549-1555. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dex230.

引用本文的文献

1
Mapping cancer patient online support groups: enhancing patient care in a low-middle income healthcare system.绘制癌症患者在线支持小组地图:在中低收入医疗体系中提升患者护理水平
Support Care Cancer. 2025 May 19;33(6):480. doi: 10.1007/s00520-025-09535-1.
2
A hidden web of policy influence: The pharmaceutical industry's engagement with UK's All-Party Parliamentary Groups.政策影响的隐秘网络:制药业与英国各党派议会团体的互动。
PLoS One. 2021 Jun 24;16(6):e0252551. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252551. eCollection 2021.
3
'Lines in the sand': an Australian qualitative study of patient group practices to promote independence from pharmaceutical industry funders.

本文引用的文献

1
Adherence is the critical factor for achieving molecular responses in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia who achieve complete cytogenetic responses on imatinib.对于在伊马替尼治疗下达到完全细胞遗传学缓解的慢性髓性白血病患者,其分子学反应的取得取决于是否有较好的依从性。
J Clin Oncol. 2010 May 10;28(14):2381-8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.3087. Epub 2010 Apr 12.
2
Co-operation between patient organisations and the drug industry in Finland.芬兰的患者组织与制药行业的合作。
Soc Sci Med. 2010 Apr;70(8):1171-5. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.005. Epub 2010 Feb 12.
3
Partial progress: governing the pharmaceutical industry and the NHS, 1948-2008.
“划清界限”:一项关于澳大利亚患者群体为促进摆脱制药行业资助者而采取的实践的定性研究。
BMJ Open. 2021 Feb 9;11(2):e045140. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045140.
4
Five years of pharmaceutical industry funding of patient organisations in Sweden: Cross-sectional study of companies, patient organisations and drugs.瑞典制药业对患者组织五年的资助情况:对公司、患者组织和药物的横断面研究。
PLoS One. 2020 Jun 24;15(6):e0235021. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235021. eCollection 2020.
5
Financial relationships between patient and consumer representatives and the health industry: A systematic review.患者和消费者代表与卫生行业之间的财务关系:系统评价。
Health Expect. 2020 Apr;23(2):483-495. doi: 10.1111/hex.13013. Epub 2019 Dec 19.
6
Knowledge, Beliefs and Attitudes of Patients and the General Public towards the Interactions of Physicians with the Pharmaceutical and the Device Industry: A Systematic Review.患者及普通公众对医生与制药和器械行业互动的认知、信念和态度:一项系统综述
PLoS One. 2016 Aug 24;11(8):e0160540. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160540. eCollection 2016.
部分进展:1948-2008 年监管制药行业和国民保健制度。
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2009 Dec;34(6):931-77. doi: 10.1215/03616878-2009-032.
4
Prevalence, determinants, and outcomes of nonadherence to imatinib therapy in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia: the ADAGIO study.慢性髓性白血病患者伊马替尼治疗不依从的患病率、决定因素及结局:ADAGIO研究
Blood. 2009 May 28;113(22):5401-11. doi: 10.1182/blood-2008-12-196543. Epub 2009 Apr 6.
5
In whose interest? Relationships between health consumer groups and the pharmaceutical industry in the UK.为了谁的利益?英国健康消费者群体与制药行业之间的关系。
Sociol Health Illn. 2008 Sep;30(6):929-43. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2008.01109.x.
6
Health consumer and patients' organizations in Europe: towards a comparative analysis.欧洲的健康消费者与患者组织:迈向比较分析
Health Expect. 2008 Mar;11(1):85-94. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00472.x.
7
Lifestyle habits as a contributor to anti-cancer treatment failure.生活方式习惯是导致抗癌治疗失败的一个因素。
Eur J Cancer. 2008 Feb;44(3):374-82. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2007.12.012. Epub 2008 Jan 22.
8
Corporate colonization of health activism? Irish health advocacy organizations' modes of engagement with pharmaceutical corporations.健康维权行动的企业殖民化?爱尔兰健康倡导组织与制药公司的合作模式。
Int J Health Serv. 2007;37(4):711-33. doi: 10.2190/HS.37.4.h.
9
Should patient groups accept money from drug companies? No.患者群体应该接受制药公司的资金吗?不应该。
BMJ. 2007 May 5;334(7600):935. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39185.394005.AD.
10
Should patient groups accept money from drug companies? Yes.患者群体应该接受制药公司的资金吗?应该接受。
BMJ. 2007 May 5;334(7600):934. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39185.461968.AD.