"Fraud Case Rocks Anesthesiology | Arthritis Information

 

Involves Celebrex and Lyrica studies:

http://lcmedia.typepad.com/pharmola/2009/03/fraud-case-rocks-anesthesiology-community.html
"

At least 21 pubished medical studies involved the use of falsified data and fraud in what is being called one of the largest cases of academic misconduct to date.

The research was conducted by Massachusetts doctor Scott S. Reuben, MD, according to a March 2009 article in Anesthesiology News. The article also reported that a "cornerstone of Dr. Reuben's approach has been the use of [Celebrex] ... and the neuropathic pain agent [Lyrica], both manufactered by Pfizer.  Dr. Reuben has received research grants from the company and is a member of its speakers’ bureau."  (See list of reserach studies involved at bottom). " Suzanne,

You went practically straight to the paragraph that would seem to insinuate that Pfizer was part of the corruption. If a person just read what you posted, they might come to that conclusion. That paragraph was near the end of the article. The end of the paragraph that you found so important, ended with this statement that you found to be of no consequence and decided not to add to your quote, c'mon. If you think that the association was so important so as to make it look like Pfizer were a part of the fraud, why wasn't this statement from the very same very short paragraph not quoted?

"Pfizer was unable to comment by the time this article went to press. The company has not been accused of wrongdoing in the matter."

LEV
[QUOTE=levlarry]Suzanne,

You went practically straight to the paragraph that would seem to insinuate that Pfizer was part of the corruption. If a person just read what you posted, they might come to that conclusion. That paragraph was near the end of the article.
[/QUOTE]

I don't know where the link sent you, but the paragraph I quoted is the very first one that comes up!

I hope everyone reads the entire article, though. 
This is paragraph that concerned me:
"All of that is now in question, said Steven L. Shafer, MD, editor-in-chief of Anesthesia and Analgesia, which retracted 10 of Dr. Reuben’s articles. “We are left with a large hole in our understanding of this field. There are substantial tendrils from this body of work that reach throughout the discipline of postoperative pain management,” Dr. Shafer said. “Those tendrils mean that almost every aspect will need to be carefully thought through. What do we still believe to be true? Do the conclusions hold up to scrutiny?”

Dr. Shafer said that although he still believes “philosophically” in multimodal analgesia, he can no longer be absolutely certain of its benefits without confirmation from future studies."



It made me wonder if those 'tendrils' reach into other disciplines.  But is a reassuring he still feels there is a benefit even with these findings - I guess he has seen it help his patients, regardless of whether or not the studies are valid.
Here it is Suzanne,
The part you chopped is in red, the part you omitted, that is extremely important to the paragraph of information is in blue.

In what experts are calling one of the largest known cases of academic misconduct, a leading anesthesiology researcher has been accused of falsifying data and other fraud in potentially dozens of published studies.

Scott S. Reuben, MD, of Baystate Medical Center in Springfield, Mass., a pioneer in the area of multimodal analgesia, is said to have fabricated his results in at least 21, and perhaps many more, articles dating back to 1996. The confirmed articles were published in Anesthesiology, Anesthesia and Analgesia, the Journal of Clinical Anesthesia and other titles, which have retracted the papers or will soon do so, according to people familiar with the scandal (see list). The journals stressed that Dr. Reuben’s co-authors on those papers have not been accused of wrongdoing.

In addition to allegedly falsifying data, Dr. Reuben seems to have committed publishing forgery. Evan Ekman, MD, an orthopedic surgeon in Columbia, S.C., said his name appeared as a co-author on at least two of the retracted papers, despite his having had no hand in the manuscripts. “My names were forgeries on the documents,” Dr. Ekman told Anesthesiology News. 

Dr. Reuben has been an extremely active and visible figure in multimodal analgesia, particularly as an advocate for its use in minimally invasive orthopedic and spine procedures. His research has provided support for several mainstays of current anesthetic practice, such as the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and neuropathic agents instead of opioids and preemptive analgesia. Dr. Reuben has also published and presented data suggesting that multimodal analgesia can significantly improve long-term outcomes for patients.

Incomprehensible Course

All of that is now in question, said Steven L. Shafer, MD, editor-in-chief of Anesthesia and Analgesia, which retracted 10 of Dr. Reuben’s articles. “We are left with a large hole in our understanding of this field. There are substantial tendrils from this body of work that reach throughout the discipline of postoperative pain management,” Dr. Shafer said. “Those tendrils mean that almost every aspect will need to be carefully thought through. What do we still believe to be true? Do the conclusions hold up to scrutiny?”

Dr. Shafer said that although he still believes “philosophically” in multimodal analgesia, he can no longer be absolutely certain of its benefits without confirmation from future studies.

Dr. Shafer called the scandal “a tragedy” for the profession, for patients and for Dr. Reuben personally. “I cannot begin to comprehend why a person would take this course,” he said of the research fraud.

Efforts to reach Dr. Reuben were unsuccessful.

Internal Inquiry Revealed Sweeping Misconduct 

The retractions came after an internal investigation by Baystate turned up evidence of widespread fraud in Dr. Reuben’s research. Jane Albert, a spokeswoman for Baystate, said the inquiry was undertaken after an internal reviewer at the medical center had raised questions last year. Ms. Albert said the hospital’s investigation raised “no allegations concerning any patient care. This was focused on academic integrity.”

Dr. Reuben is on medical leave from his position as chief of the acute pain service at Baystate, Ms. Albert said. 

Dr. Reuben, who was educated at Columbia University and received his medical degree from SUNY at Buffalo School of Medicine, is well-known among anesthesiology researchers for his studies of multimodal analgesia, the practice of combining several forms of pain relief to better control postoperative discomfort and promote faster recovery from surgery. 

Rumors of a problem with Dr. Reuben’s research have been circulating among academic anesthesiologists for a year, according to people familiar with the matter.

"Interestingly, when you look at Scott’s output over the last 15 years, he never had a negative study,” said one colleague, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “In fact, they were all very robust results—where others had failed to show much difference. I just don’t understand why anyone would do this or how anyone could pull this off for so long.”

A recent PubMed search for Dr. Reuben’s name turned up 72 citations, the most recent an article in the December issue of the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia on preventing the development of chronic pain after thoracic surgery.

“Massive” Breach of Trust

Josephine Johnston, an attorney specializing in research integrity at the Hastings Center, in Garrison, N.Y., called the scope of the Reuben fraud “massive.” 

"It’s usually just one article, not a body of work,” Ms. Johnston said.

What’s particularly surprising given the dimensions of the case, Ms. Johnston said, is that Dr. Reuben’s research managed to raise no alarms among peer reviewers. However, she added, “the peer review system can only do so much. Trust is a major component of the academic world. It’s backed up by the implication that your reputation will be destroyed if you violate that trust.” 

A cornerstone of Dr. Reuben’s approach has been the use of the selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor celecoxib (Celebrex) and the neuropathic pain agent pregabalin (Lyrica), both manufactured by Pfizer. Dr. Reuben has received research grants from the company and is a member of its speakers’ bureau. However, a source told Anesthesiology News that Pfizer recently alerted its speakers to remove any reference to Dr. Reuben’s data from their presentations. Pfizer was unable to comment by the time this article went to press. The company has not been accused of wrongdoing in the matter.

Jacques Chelly, MD, PhD, MBA, director of the Division of Regional Anesthesia and Acute Interventional Perioperative Pain at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC), said that the Reuben episode has left multimodal analgesia “in shambles concerning many of the drugs we use”—particularly celecoxib and pregabalin. “The big chunk of what people have based their protocol on is gone.”

In light of the situation and economic concerns, UPMC has stopped giving celecoxib and pregabalin to surgery patients “until we have some very formal evidence that we should do something else,” Dr. Chelly said. “In this day and age, doing multimodal [therapy] is expensive. Any institution is going to look at evidence-based clinical decisions, and unless we have very strong data, it is a problem.”

One of the pillars of support for combining celecoxib and pregabalin was a 2006 study inAnesthesia and Analgesia—for which Dr. Reuben has been a reviewer—by Dr. Reuben and colleagues that found the approach effective in patients undergoing spinal surgery. That paper has been withdrawn. “If we take out [those] data in spinal,” Dr. Chelly said, “you really don’t have any evidence that the combination is working.”

levlarry2009-03-09 11:57:34 [QUOTE=levlarry]Here it is Suzanne,
The part you chopped is in red, the part you omitted, that is extremely important to the paragraph of information is in blue.


[/QUOTE]

Lev, I didn't 'chop' anything.  Get real, go to the link I posted.  The paragraph I quoted is at the top, in its entirety, and I guess was written by someone at the site.  Next comes the entire article you just copied.

I've got no bone to pick with Pfizer.  Zithromax!  Zithromax!  Zithromax!  And the generic is manufactured by Pfizer-owned Greenstone.  Go Pfizer!  Go Greenstone!
Carpool time, time to go pick up Zithgirl - but I think I should add that Pfizer in no way endorses or comments on off-label.  Seriously.  Do not call them to ask anything about off-label use.  Ever.  Makes them very nervous.  They are very polite and happy you like their product....they just can't comment LOL Suzanne,

I beg your pardon. I read the article. Not the cut and paste top of the page that you quoted that Pharmola had chopped from the article and then pasted. I beg your pardon. "They" chopped the article, posting in an insinuating way, and you posted from the chop, not the article. What you posted is not a part of the article, but "chops" of the article, did you know that? Shame on them.

LEV

Suzanne- Pharmola is a product of LCM, Lichtenstein Creative Media. The President is Bill Lichtenstein. Yous anti-big pharm may have heard of him when reading about Senator Grassleys drug investigations. Bill Lichtenstein was the producer of a show that aired on public radio called Infinite Mind and hosted by Dr. Goodwin. Not anymore.

Bill Lichtenstein was a investigative reporter for 20/20, Nightline and World News Tonight. It is disgraceful I think for Pharmola to insinuate ties to the Doctor accused of corruption and Pfizer. Pfizer may very well be involved, but certainly nothing shows that to be the case as Pharmola tried to suggest, and Suzanne, you may want to reconsider this disgraceful website as one of your sources of information. . That's just disgraceful reporting.

You can all read the story about Lichtenstein and Infinite Mind and the Doctor that received over a million dollars from big pharm while promoting drugs. Lichtenstein denied that he knew about the conflicts of interest but the doctor claims that Lichtenstien was well aware of the money and conflicts.

Anyway, if this link won't click, just copy and paste. From the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/22/health/22radio.html?_r=1

LEVLev, stop being a twit.  She posted from the top.  You are the cut-and-paste-King.  It's not like you have any idea of half of what you post.  LOL [QUOTE=levlarry] It is disgraceful I think for Pharmola to insinuate ties to the Doctor accused of corruption and Pfizer. Pfizer may very well be involved, but certainly nothing shows that to be the case as Pharmola tried to suggest, and Suzanne, you may want to reconsider this disgraceful website as one of your sources of information. . That's just disgraceful reporting.



LEV[/QUOTE]

It is the doctor who is disgraceful in my opinion.  Like they said in the article, it is incomprehensible. 
Suzanne,

You are responsible for what you post here. It is your responsibility to ensure that what you post is accurate and not mis-leading. You should have read the "article" and posted from the "article" which was accurate.You chose to copy the chopped version that deceitfully trys to implicate Pfizer. Disgraceful. What you posted is mis-leading and deceitful, posted in a way to deceive. But without the Pfizer connection, there isn't much of an interesting story is there? Corrupt doctor gets busted, big deal. That's on you.

You and your partner Pip seem to be on the same boat of thought for your partner Pip posted this:

Lev, I post links that adults can read or not and make up their own minds.

If a product is mentioned in a story, the manufacturer of the product is mentioned in a thorough news report.  It did not seem unexpected to see Pfizer mentioned in a story involving two of their meds.

If the disgraceful doctor had 72 discredited studies about Big Macs, I'm sure McDonald's would have come up.  Would you find that deceitful??????

Lev..what on earth makes you write such rubbish...from Suzannes post I didnt get anything from it like you posted...you accuse so many people of wrong doing but you are the one who instigates trouble...

Thanks Suzanne for the INFORMATIVE post

Thanks Pincusion,

Now that I have your attention, I will once again ask you to show where I made racist statements against your "black" godchildren. You are one nasty person, Pincusion. You made false statements agains me and also IO. With IO you admitted you had no proof for your reckless accusations that turned out to be untrue. Pincusion, you need to clean your dirty self, no offense. You posted this about me and more than once, I've asked you for the posts where I did that. Well, I'm still waiting.

"I used to shut up and ignore them but if someone new signs in and i chat to them they wont get any help if they believe what Lev writes about me and others...Lev only comes in here when the board is starting to turn  peaceful, he stirs it up and spews out his own brand of rubbish. He supports people like AA who came in here with her racist ideals, he wrote a post to me and in it he picked on my two god children who are only 3 and 1 for being mixed race."

So, Pincusion, once more, post my post where I picked on your two godchildren for being mixed race. Pincusion, that is so ugly of you to say that just to try to win an arguement. Hopefully your godchildren do not spend much time with you and so to ensure that they don't get brainwashed with your filthiness. For those that find this mean or ugly, there is no way to clean up what Pincusion said about me.

Oh, and you are also one of those involved in posting other members personal information. You are one troubled individual.

LEV
levlarry2009-03-10 08:07:32[QUOTE=Mrs Pincushion]

Lev..what on earth makes you write such rubbish...from Suzannes post I didnt get anything from it like you posted...you accuse so many people of wrong doing but you are the one who instigates trouble...

Thanks Suzanne for the INFORMATIVE post

[/QUOTE]