Editor's Corner

It's been a busy week for the FDA's expert panels, with big decisions on Tarceva for pancreatic cancer (yes), Pfizer's Oporia for osteoprosis (no), and others. But as The New York Times made clear again, these panels are still riddled with apparent conflicts. While one panelist feels compelled to stand aside because of past financial relationships and deny expert input as a cardiologist, others decide to ignore past consulting deals and make key votes for companies that continue to channel millions to researchers. There needs to be clearly spelled out rules governing conflicts within the FDA to dispel the well-earned impression that drug companies are able to dictate a drug's fate with its check book. Perhaps backup panelists are needed to step in when conflicts arise. The system as it exists today is unworkable. - John Carroll