Eight University of Minnesota bioethics professors are asking the Board of Regents to investigate a drug study that lost a participant to suicide six years ago.
In a letter to the board Monday, the professors questioned whether U psychiatrists lacked ethical judgment in enrolling the victim, Dan Markingson, a schizophrenic who may have lacked the wherewithal to consent to research. They also questioned whether financial incentives from AstraZeneca, the drugmaker funding the study, presented conflicts for the researchers, Dr. Stephen Olson and Dr. S. Charles Schulz.
The criticisms aren't new: The May 2004 death drew reviews by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the state mental health ombudsman, a lawsuit by Markingson's mother, and media investigations. The FDA found no fault by the university. A judge excused the U of M and Schulz, chairman of the U's psychiatry department, from the mother's lawsuit. Olson then settled the case.
But now the criticism is coming from leading ethicists within the institution.
"While it is understandable that some of our colleagues will have little interest in revisiting this case and the ethical issues it raises, we are persuaded that there is a disturbing and unjustifiable gap between how the University has responded to this death and the careful, critical investigation it warrants," the professors wrote.
U leaders will take the letter seriously and take the protection of human research subjects seriously, said the U's general counsel, Mark Rotenberg. He stressed that other government entities have found no causal link between the study and the death.
"The fact that this is tragic doesn't mean the treating physicians did anything wrong," he said.
Earlier this year, the university updated its conflict-of-interest policies to limit the financial support doctors can receive while conducting research.