U.K. Medical Journal Questions Avandia License
by ilene - September 6th, 2010 3:49 pm
Followup on "After Avandia: Does the FDA Have a Drug Problem?" – Ilene
U.K. Medical Journal Questions Avandia License
BY JASON DOUGLAS AND STEN STOVALL, WSJ
LONDON—The British Medical Journal on Monday said GlaxoSmithKline PLC’s diabetes drug Avandia should never have been licensed and should be withdrawn from sale, a claim the company rejected.
An investigation by the journal found the U.K. Commission on Human Medicines in July advised the country’s drugs regulator, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, to withdraw Avandia from sale because its risks outweigh its benefits.
The probe also found members of a European panel that reviewed the drug prior to its European Union-wide approval in 2000 had concerns about the long-term risks and benefits of Avandia, also known as rosiglitazone. The journal raised concerns about the quality of the data GlaxoSmithKline used to show Avandia didn’t lead to increased heart problems compared with other diabetes drugs.
Avandia was once Glaxo’s second-biggest drug, raking in about $3 billion a year. But its sales have plunged since a U.S. study linked it to heart attacks in 2007, and second-quarter revenue was only £152 million ($235 million) as patients defected to alternatives, such as Takeda Pharmaceutical Co.’s Actos.
 Twitter
|
LinkedIn
|
 del.icio.us
|
|
After Avandia: Does the FDA Have a Drug Problem?
by ilene - August 14th, 2010 2:47 pm
This could have been titled, "Does America Have an FDA Problem?" My yellow highlighting and red comments. – Ilene
After Avandia: Does the FDA Have a Drug Problem?
By Massimo Calabresi with Alice Park, courtesy of TIME
Five days before a 2007 article in the New England Journal of Medicine showed that the diabetes drug Avandia was linked to a 43% increase in heart attacks compared with other medications or placebos, a group of scientists and executives from the drug’s maker, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), gathered in a conference room at the offices of the Food and Drug Administration in White Oak, Md. The GSK goal: to convince regulators that the evidence that the company’s $3 billion-a-year blockbuster drug caused heart problems was inconclusive. To do that, the GSK officials focused not on heart-attack data but on a broader, less well defined category of heart problems called myocardial ischemia. The most recent studies of Avandia, the GSK officials told the FDA, had "yielded information that is inconsistent with an increased risk of myocardial ischemic events," according to sealed court proceedings obtained by TIME.
What GSK didn’t tell the FDA was that on May 14, 2007, two days before the White Oak meeting, GSK’s Global Safety Board had noted that a new assessment of Avandia studies "strengthens the [cardiac-risk] signal observed in the [previous] analysis." Or that eight days earlier, the company’s head of research and development, Moncef Slaoui, had sent an e-mail to its chief medical officer saying Avandia patients showed an "increased risk of ischemic event ranging from 30% to 43%!" Or that the day before the meeting, the company had produced a preliminary draft report that showed patients on Avandia had a 46% greater likelihood of heart attack than those in a control group.
But the mixed-evidence argument GSK presented to the FDA worked. After months of deliberation, the agency decided to keep the drug on the market — a move worth billions of dollars to GSK but that also may have put millions of patients at risk.
Such examples of the drug industry’s outmaneuvering FDA regulators are disturbingly common, say both scientists and policymakers who follow drug approval and safety monitoring. More than 140 million Americans take at least one prescription drug in any given month, and they rely on the FDA to ensure those drugs are safe. That trust, the story of Avandia illustrates, is…
|
Twitter
|
LinkedIn
|
del.icio.us
|
|
Something to Love about GSK
by ilene - June 23rd, 2010 4:29 pm
Something to Love about GSK
Courtesy of Pharmboy
Visit Pharmboy here for his previous articles on pharm/biotech stocks and chapters in his TA book.
UK-based GlaxoSmithKline was ranked as the world’s fourth largest player in 2009 (behind US-based Pfizer, France-based Sanofi-Aventis and Switzerland-based Novartis) based on prescription pharma sales. The company was founded in 2000 via the merger of Glaxo Wellcome and SmithKline Beecham and is headquartered in Brentford, London, UK. I wrote about GSK in my first PSW write-up in 2009.
In terms of its therapeutic focus, GSK owes its market-leading position in the global respiratory market to the Glaxo Laboratories legacy. Over 30 years ago, Glaxo launched Ventolin for the treatment of asthma and developed and launched Serevent and Flixotide in 1990. A combination of these two compounds—sold under the brand names Seretide/Advair ($7.8B in 2009). Similarly, GSK’s origins in the CNS market—currently its third largest therapeutic area of focus—can be traced back to the Wellcome and SmithKline scientists. Other therapeutic areas of importance include infectious disease and virology (vaccines).
What GSK has done instead is sought to in-license product rights in order to boost the sales potential of its portfolio. Of the eight products launched by GSK since 2000, four have been in-licensed (Lexiva from Vertex, Levitra from Bayer, Boniva from Roche and Vesicare from Astellas). However,
…
|
Twitter
|
LinkedIn
|
del.icio.us
|
|
Study Suggests HPV Vaccine Is Safe, but Doctors Wary
by ilene - August 19th, 2009 11:12 am
Study Suggests HPV Vaccine Is Safe, but Doctors Wary
By Alice Park, courtesy of TIME
Generally the fact that a vaccine appears to be as safe as the manufacturer had promised shouldn’t be news. It should be a given. But when it comes to the controversial vaccine against human papillomavirus (HPV), even the most straightforward data come with an asterisk.
The vaccine, called Gardasil and manufactured by Merck, is one of the first immunizations to protect against a cancer — in this case, cervical cancer, which is most commonly caused by infection with HPV. Because the virus is sexually transmitted, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended in 2006 that girls get the vaccine at ages 11 and 12, before they become sexually active, so they have the best chance of avoiding the cancer and genital warts caused by HPV. States joined in, attempting to mandate HPV vaccination for school entry, but parents balked, in part because of concerns about encouraging promiscuity. It didn’t help that girls were prone to fainting after getting the shot or that more than two dozen girls died shortly after getting immunized.
To address those concerns, researchers at the CDC and the FDA, which keep track of adverse events related to vaccines once they are approved, now report in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) that the rate of adverse events associated with the 23 million doses of Gardasil administered since 2006 is similar to the prelicensing rate among the 21,000 girls and young women who tested it in clinical trials and to that of other vaccines.
That should be reassuring. But the study did find that users of Gardasil faint and develop blood clots more often than those receiving other shots. The clots are extremely rare, though. In about 90% of these cases, the girls may have been more vulnerable to developing clots because they smoked or were overweight or on birth control pills. "Was it that this age group also tends to have these risk factors or did the vaccine have some sort of role?" asks the CDC’s Dr. Barbara Slade, lead author of the paper. "We really don’t know."
It’s that uncertainty that is beginning to bother many physicians about the HPV vaccine. According to Dr. Charlotte Haug, editor in chief of the Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association and author of an editorial that JAMA…
|
Twitter
|
LinkedIn
|
del.icio.us
|
|
German
Spanish
French
Italian
Portuguese
Japanese
Korean
Russian
Chinese
Philip R. Davis is a founder Phil's Stock World, a stock and options trading site that teaches the art of options trading to newcomers and devises advanced strategies for expert traders...
Ilene is editor and affiliate program
coordinator for PSW. She manages the site