August 1, 2008

Stanford Researcher, Accused of Conflicts, Steps Down as NIH Principal Investigator

Alan F. Schatzberg, a Stanford University researcher under fire for a possible financial conflict of interest, is stepping down temporarily as principal investigator on his grant from a division of the National Institutes of Health. Notice of the decision, an agreement between the university and the researcher, was sent yesterday by letter and e-mail to that division, the National Institute of Mental Health.

Dr. Schatzberg, a psychiatrist, had drawn the scrutiny of Sen. Charles E. Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, who during the last year has been investigating possible financial conflicts of interest by scientific researchers.

Senator Grassley had focused on Mr. Schatzberg’s financial connection to Corcept Therapeutics, a drug-development company that the psychiatrist had helped create and in which he had several millions of dollars’ worth of stock. Dr. Schatzberg was leading an NIH-financed investigation of the biology of psychotic depression. The project included studies of the effectiveness of mifepristone — a controversial drug that is used to induce abortions — as an antidepressant.

Senator Grassley sent two letters of inquiry to Stanford this week. In a letter on Thursday, he pointed out that the researcher’s stock holding “could grow dramatically if the results of Dr. Schatzberg’s government-sponsored research find that mifepristone could be used to treat psychotic major depression.”

In its letter to the mental-health institute, the university said that the psychiatrist “appropriately disclosed any potential financial conflict of interest.” Further, the university said, someone else directed research for the portion of the grant that involved the mifepristone trials, “so that [Dr. Schatzberg] was not involved.”

But because Dr. Schatzberg remained listed as principal investigator of the grant, Senator Grassley has asked the university to explain how, if the psychiatrist didn’t play any role in the recruitment, assessment, or follow-up of subjects involved in the mifepristone trials, he could monitor the research as the NIH asks principal investigators to do.

“Despite our belief that Stanford, NIMH, and Dr. Schatzberg have handled this grant in accordance with the regulations and applicable policies and with due regard for the integrity of the research, we can see how having Dr. Schatzberg continue as the principal investigator on the grant can create an appearance of conflict of interest, and we want to eliminate that concern,” the letter from Stanford reads. The university will appoint another faculty member with no financial ties to Corcept Therapeutics as interim principal investigator on the grant.

Senator Grassley has also asked Stanford to explain its own financial ties with the drug-development company. The senator, who has given Stanford until August 14 to answer his questions, says the university had licensing agreements with Corcept for mifepristone. —Maria José Viñas

Comments

1. I am proud of Senator Grassley for his work.

   SSRI antidepressants can cause mania and psychosis according to the Physicians Desk Reference.

   Go to www.SSRIstories.com for a list of over 2400 criminal cases involving antidepressants that were reported by the media and where the antidepressant is mentioned in the media article.

   The full media article is available. 46 of the cases involving SSRI antidepressants are school shootings.

   — Darlene Mitchell    Aug 1, 11:34 PM    #

2. Schatzberg had $6 million invested in the company that was getting a drug approved by the FDA while taking NIH dollars to investigate that same drug.

   Does Stanford really believe that Schatzberg’s $6 million investments gives only the “appearance of conflict of interest?”

   — Jennifer    Aug 2, 12:03 PM    #

3. Ah! Will the faculty member appointed to oversee Schatzberg’s NIH funded research have personal or professional ties to Sachatzberg? If so, what research results can be anticipated?

   — D.H. Harper    Aug 4, 06:52 AM    #

4. An SSRI saved my life and still allows me to actively contribute to society. My guess is that you can find many more of those stories except that productive people post complaints a lot less.

   — jc    Aug 4, 11:02 AM    #

5. The Stanford researcher’s conflict must be dealt with. But somehow Darlene above translates that into blanket condemnation of SSRIs. That’s bull. SSRIs have helped millons. To link them to school shootings is like saying x number of school shooters ate food or took aspirin.

   I Darlene is a Scientology flunky, as this group has waged war against psychiatry. I suspect that’s because so many Scientologists are NUTS!

   — Richard    Aug 4, 11:05 AM    #

6. Uh-oh. Scientologist in the room! SSRIs saved my life. I guess I should have avoided a simple pill and instead spent tens of thousands of dollars for a 10th Level Thetan from the Xenu’s Galactic Confederacy.

   — Wunderkind    Aug 4, 11:35 AM    #

7. this story isn’t even about SSRIs. the drug under study isn’t an SSRI.

   SSRIs cause mania in bipolar patients.

   — in the know    Aug 4, 02:07 PM    #

Previous: Bush Names Acting Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education
Next: New Senate Bill Would Satisfy Some College Concerns in Updating Disabilities Law