corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 10878

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: news

von Wartburg L.
Amid Accusatory Debate, FDA Puts Black Box Warning on Avandia and Actos
Diabetes Health 2007 Jul 11
http://www.diabeteshealth.com/read/2007/07/11/5314.html


Full text:

In a congressional hearing on June 13, 2007, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revealed that it has called for a black box warning, the sternest possible, on both Actos and Avandia.

More than a year ago, an FDA drug-safety supervisor recommended that Avandia carry that very warning and was promptly reprimanded for her pains.

After Dr. Nissen’s controversial article appeared last month in the New England Journal of Medicine, however, it took the FDA only two days to call for the black box upgrade regarding heart risk.

Throughout the hearing, which was chaired by Democratic Representative Henry Waxman of California, the Democrats criticized the FDA for being lax and the Republicans criticized Dr. Nissen for being inflammatory. Following the contentious meeting, a senior official at GlaxoSmithKline said that the whole issue has been blown out of proportion just so that Democrats can find fault with President Bush’s FDA.

During the hearing, a representative of GlaxoSmithKline testified that interim results from the lengthy RECORD trial are reassuring, finding no significant difference in cardiovascular death and heart attack between Avandia takers and control groups.

Apparently both Avandia and Actos are discussing the new warnings with the FDA, in a process that the companies say is supposed to take weeks to months. Since the Nissen report came out last month, Avandia prescriptions have fallen by twenty percent.

Sources: International Herald Tribune
The Wall Street Journal

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








...to influence multinational corporations effectively, the efforts of governments will have to be complemented by others, notably the many voluntary organisations that have shown they can effectively represent society’s public-health interests…
A small group known as Healthy Skepticism; formerly the Medical Lobby for Appropriate Marketing) has consistently and insistently drawn the attention of producers to promotional malpractice, calling for (and often securing) correction. These organisations [Healthy Skepticism, Médecins Sans Frontières and Health Action International] are small, but they are capable; they bear malice towards no one, and they are inscrutably honest. If industry is indeed persuaded to face up to its social responsibilities in the coming years it may well be because of these associations and others like them.
- Dukes MN. Accountability of the pharmaceutical industry. Lancet. 2002 Nov 23; 360(9346)1682-4.