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: 14035

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: Journal Article

Cudny ME, Graham AS.
Adverse-drug-event data provided by pharmaceutical companies.
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008 Jun 1; 65:(11):1071-5
http://www.ajhp.org/cgi/content/full/65/11/1071


Abstract:

PURPOSE: Pharmaceutical company drug information center (PCDIC) responses to queries about adverse drug events (ADEs) were studied to determine whether PCDICs search sources other than the prescribing information on the package insert (PI) and whether the PCDICs’ approach differs according to whether an ADE is listed in the PI (labeled) or not (unlabeled). METHODS: Companies were selected from a list of PCDICs in the Physicians’ Desk Reference. One oral or injectable prescription drug from each company was selected. For each drug, a labeled ADE and an unlabeled ADE about which to query the PCDICs were randomly selected from the index of an annual publication on ADEs. The investigators telephoned the PCDICs with an open-ended inquiry about the incidence, timing, and management of the ADE as reported in the literature and the company’s internal data; they clarified that the request did not concern a specific patient. Whether or not information was provided, the source searched was recorded (PI, literature, internal database), and the percentages of PCDICs that used each source for labeled and for unlabeled ADEs were analyzed. RESULTS: Results were obtained from 100 companies to questions about 100 drugs (200 ADEs). For ADEs overall, 80% used the PI, 50% the medical literature, and 38% internal data. For labeled versus unlabeled ADEs, respectively, the PI was used by 84% and 76%; literature, both 50%; and internal data, 35% and 41%. The PCDIC specialists referencing the PI did not always provide accurate or up-to-date information. Some specialists, when asked to query internal databases, said that was not an option. CONCLUSION: For both labeled and unlabeled ADEs, the PI was the primary source used by PCDICs to answer safety questions about their products, and internal data were the least-used source. Most resources used by PCDICs are readily available to practicing pharmacists.

Keywords:
Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems/standards* Drug Industry* Drug Information Services/standards* Drug Labeling/standards* Humans Pharmaceutical Preparations/adverse effects* Prescriptions, Drug* Product Labeling/standards* Product Surveillance, Postmarketing/standards

 

  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








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909