Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Asthma / January 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Advair Warning

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
dave - 05 Jan 2006 17:45 GMT
Oct. 7, 2005

GlaxoSmithKline Misled FDA, Doctors and Patients with Faulty Asthma
Drug
Study, Public Citizen Writes in Lancet Medical Journal

Drug Maker Included Data From Six Months After Trial Ended, Skewing
Results

WASHINGTON, D.C. - GlaxoSmithKline presented misleading results to the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from a study of the popular asthma
drug salmeterol (Serevent, known as Advair when combined with the
steroid fluticasone), Public Citizen writes in a letter in this week's
issue of The Lancet.

In 1996, the Salmeterol Multicenter Asthma Research Trial was initiated

to study tens of thousands of asthma patients who received either
salmeterol or a placebo. The study lasted 28 weeks and showed an
increased risk of asthma-related death for those taking salmeterol. The

results have never been published, although GlaxoSmithKline presented
the interim results to the FDA in July 2003, when the drug came up for
review before the FDA's Pulmonary-Allergy Drugs Advisory Committee. The

company submitted final study data to the FDA on August 29, 2003.

However, that data included adverse events that were reported six
months
after the trial ended and were not to be included, according to the
original study protocol. The inclusion of the post-study data reduced
the apparent dangers of salmeterol with respect to four critical study
outcomes, including asthma-related death.

GlaxoSmithKline did not clearly inform the FDA that the final study
included data from six months after the trial had concluded until the
FDA inquired about the results in April 2004. The FDA had presumed the
data were only from the 28-week trial itself, since that was the
"period
of interest," according to the FDA.

Since learning of the suspicious reporting of the study results, the
FDA's Pulmonary-Allergy Drugs Advisory Committee on July 13, 2005,
recommended strengthening the warning on the labels for both Servent
and
Advair, but the agency has yet to make a final decision. Public Citizen

learned of the misleading data presentation from materials provided to
the advisory committee.

"The behavior of GlaxoSmithKline in submitting these faulty data is
deplorable," said Dr. Peter Lurie, deputy director of Public Citizen's
Health Research Group and co-author of the letter. "Absent greater
transparency at the FDA, we will never know how often this kind of
self-serving data analysis occurs."

Public Citizen listed Serevent as a "Do Not Use" drug in its Worst
Pills, Best Pills newsletter (www.worstpills.org) in March 2003 because

of the interim study results.

Salmeterol was dispensed more than 2.1 million times in U.S. pharmacies

in 2004. The combination product, Advair, was dispensed more than 16.1
million times in U.S. pharmacies that year.
00doc - 06 Jan 2006 01:12 GMT
> Public Citizen listed Serevent as a "Do Not Use" drug in its Worst
> Pills, Best Pills newsletter (www.worstpills.org) in March 2003 because

Eh, old news. Really what it shows is that there is bias and incompatance
all around. Sure, the handling of data by GSK is deplorable. It is also
deplorable that the FDA is so incompetant that they couldn't pick it up
until someone else with no information not available to the FDA had to point
it out. Then again, the quote above shows that "Public Citizen" is also not
above a bit of propagandist spinning.

Servent is safe when used correctly and dangerous when not. There are not
many drugs that can be used innapropriately without fear of adverse
consequances.

The fix for this sort of thing is already starting. There is a large trial
registry that records the study design before data is collected. This should
make it obvious when something is changed. If you want to advocate for
something make it be that the government mandates that all human trials be
entered.

Signature

00doc

Richard Friedel - 06 Jan 2006 07:10 GMT
Good example of mindless spin doctoring.

Spin doctor: An individual charged with getting others to interpret a
statement or event from a particular viewpoint, as in Charlie is the
governor's spin doctor. This term, born about 1980 along with spin
control, uses doctor in the colloquial sense of "one who repairs
something."

Couldn't help it. Be posting some mind-full stuff soon. Regards,
Richard Friedel
NorthShoreCEO - 06 Jan 2006 12:10 GMT
Be posting some mind-full stuff soon. Regards,
> Richard Friedel

That would be a first.  Mindful stuff being posted by Richard the
Liar.
ARoberts - 06 Jan 2006 14:38 GMT
> Good example of mindless spin doctoring.
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> Couldn't help it. Be posting some mind-full stuff soon. Regards,
> Richard Friedel

Maybe if you were to sit on a bottle of Kaopectate you would quit running
off at the mouth.
Bob - 06 Jan 2006 15:00 GMT
>> Good example of mindless spin doctoring.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>Maybe if you were to sit on a bottle of Kaopectate you would quit running
>off at the mouth.

Is that a plug for anal retention?
dave - 10 Jan 2006 18:42 GMT
IGNORANT:    Someone that refuses to accept the fact that the Dr.s and
drug companies that they are in bed with are killing a lot of innocent
people in persuit of the all mighty $$$.
00doc - 11 Jan 2006 03:05 GMT
> IGNORANT:    Someone that refuses to accept the fact that the Dr.s and
> drug companies that they are in bed with are killing a lot of innocent
> people in persuit of the all mighty $$$.

OK - I get the drug company part. They spend a few hundred million or so
developing a  drug and stand to make a few billion if it turns into a
blockbuster which it will all except for those pesky few people that had
heart attacks while taking it.....one can see where the tempation to fudge
some data comes from.

But enlighten me on how the doctors make money by colluding with the drug
companies to kill people.

Signature

00doc

dave - 16 Jan 2006 20:06 GMT
""""They spend a few hundred million or so
developing a  drug and stand to make a few billion if it turns into a
blockbuster which it will all except for those pesky few people that
had
heart attacks while taking it.....one can see where the tempation to
fudge
some data comes from. """

I resent your comment a.shole!  My father was one of those "pesky few
people that had a heart attack while taking it..."
Bob - 16 Jan 2006 22:39 GMT
> """"They spend a few hundred million or so
>developing a  drug and stand to make a few billion if it turns into a
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>I resent your comment a.shole!  My father was one of those "pesky few
>people that had a heart attack while taking it..."

I think you misunderstood the poster's facetious comment that
basically agrees with your sentiment.  Sorry to hear about your
father.
00doc - 17 Jan 2006 00:33 GMT
> """"They spend a few hundred million or so
> developing a  drug and stand to make a few billion if it turns into a
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> I resent your comment a.shole!  My father was one of those "pesky few
> people that had a heart attack while taking it..."

As Bob points out - I was being sarcastic. Of course it is important to
include those people in the data.

Sorry to hear about your father.

Signature

00doc

Nancy - 11 Jan 2006 04:28 GMT
> IGNORANT:    Someone that refuses to accept the fact that the Dr.s and
> drug companies that they are in bed with are killing a lot of innocent
> people in persuit of the all mighty $$$.

DUMBASS:  Someone who uses a health newsgroup to post his/her hatred of
doctors, healthcare, money or the President of the United States,  while
trying to cloak said hatred as "fact".  Has many aliases.  Is expert at
evading killfiles.  See also: troll, jerk, ozone generator salesman,
snake oil salesman, cell salt user, iron nut and B* believer.
ARoberts - 11 Jan 2006 14:35 GMT
>> IGNORANT:    Someone that refuses to accept the fact that the Dr.s and
>> drug companies that they are in bed with are killing a lot of innocent
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> evading killfiles.  See also: troll, jerk, ozone generator salesman, snake
> oil salesman, cell salt user, iron nut and B* believer.

I like your dictionary better...
Nancy - 12 Jan 2006 04:30 GMT
>>>IGNORANT:    Someone that refuses to accept the fact that the Dr.s and
>>>drug companies that they are in bed with are killing a lot of innocent
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> I like your dictionary better...

hehehe - it was a special printing. ; )

Life is uncertain...........eat dessert first!!

Nancy
8=: )
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.