Lessons from litigation over silicone breast implants: a call for activism by scientists

Expert Witness Participation in Civil and Criminal Proceedings

The interests of the public and both the medical and legal professions are best served when scientifically sound and unbiased expert witness testimony is readily available in civil and criminal proceedings. As members of the medical community, patient advocates, and private citizens, pediatricians have ethical and professional obligations to assist in the civil and criminal judicial processes. This technical report explains how the role of the expert witness differs in civil and criminal proceedings, legal and ethical standards for expert witnesses, and strategies that have been employed to deter unscientific and irresponsible testimony. A companion policy statement offers recommendations on advocacy, education, research, qualifications, standards, and ethical business practices all aimed at improving expert testimony.

Policy statement--Expert witness participation in civil and criminal proceedings

The interests of the public and both the medical and legal professions are best served when scientifically sound and unbiased expert witness testimony is readily available in civil and criminal proceedings. As members of the medical community, patient advocates, and private citizens, pediatricians have ethical and professional obligations to assist in the administration of justice. The American Academy of Pediatrics believes that the adoption of the recommendations outlined in this statement will improve the quality of medical expert witness testimony in legal proceedings and, thereby, increase the probability of achieving outcomes that are fair, honest, and equitable. Strategies for enforcing guidance and promoting oversight of expert witnesses are proposed.

Geographic variation in postmastectomy breast reconstruction rates

Data on postmastectomy breast reconstructive surgery were examined for 52,357 female breast cancers that were treated with mastectomy and diagnosed in geographic areas covered by the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. The proportion of cancers that involved reconstruction varied in these geographic areas in each age group (under age 70 years) by a factor of about four or five, even after adjustment for stage at diagnosis, marital status, and poverty rate of county of residence at diagnosis. Studies are needed to explain the large differences in reconstruction rates by geographic area.

Meta-analyses of the relation between silicone breast implants and the risk of connective-tissue diseases

BACKGROUND

The postulated relation between silicone breast implants and the risk of connective-tissue and autoimmune diseases has generated intense medical and legal interest during the past decade. The salience of the issue persists, despite the fact that a great deal of research has been conducted on this subject. To provide a stronger quantitative basis for addressing the postulated relation, we applied several techniques of meta-analysis that combine, compare, and summarize the results of existing relevant studies.

METHODS

We searched data bases and reviewed citations in relevant articles to identify studies that met prestated inclusion criteria. Nine cohort studies, nine case-control studies, and two cross-sectional studies were included in our meta-analyses. We conducted meta-analyses of the results of these studies, both with and without adjustment for confounding factors, and a separate analysis restricted to studies of silicone-gel-filled breast implants. Finally, we estimated the annual number of new cases of connective-tissue disease that could be attributed to breast implants.

RESULTS

There was no evidence that breast implants were associated with a significant increase in the summary adjusted relative risk of individual connective-tissue diseases (rheumatoid arthritis, 1.04 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.72 to 1.51]; systemic lupus erythematosus, 0.65 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.35 to 1.23]; scleroderma or systemic sclerosis, 1.01 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.59 to 1.73]; and Sjögren's syndrome, 1.42 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.65 to 3.11]); all definite connective-tissue diseases combined (0.80; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.62 to 1.04); or other autoimmune or rheumatic conditions (0.96; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.74 to 1.25). Nor was there evidence of significantly increased risk in the unadjusted analyses or in the analysis restricted to silicone-gel-filled implants.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of our meta-analyses, there was no evidence of an association between breast implants in general, or silicone-gel-filled breast implants specifically, and any of the individual connective-tissue diseases, all definite connective-tissue diseases combined, or other autoimmune or rheumatic conditions. From a public health perspective, breast implants appear to have a minimal effect on the number of women in whom connective-tissue diseases develop, and the elimination of implants would not be likely to reduce the incidence of connective-tissue diseases.

Science, bad science, and pseudoscience

The American public is being overwhelmed with scientific sounding claims for products to be ingested and/or applied to the body that have no research support. To protect ourselves and our patients from potential harm or unnecessarily wasting their resources, we need to be aware of the problem. In addition we need to apply the standards we have learned for critiquing research to the claims made by the purveyors of these products.