Serious Drug Toxicities Recognized During Postmarketing Surveillance
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Apr 30 - The rate of serious adverse effects in
drugs newly approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is so high
that physicians should view any new drug as a black box, researchers suggest
in the May 1st issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
However, many of the causes of past drug withdrawals are now being caught
in preclinical trials, Drs. Robert J. Temple and Martin H. Himmel, of the FDA,
comment in a journal editorial.
Investigators led by Dr. Karen E. Lasser, of Cambridge Hospital and Harvard
Medical School in Massachusetts, identified 56 new drugs--representing 10.2%
of those approved by the FDA between 1975 and 1999--that were given a new
black box warning in the Physicians' Desk Reference or were withdrawn from the
market. Half of the withdrawals occurred within 2 years after the drug's
introduction, while half of new black box warnings were issued within 7 years.
Dr. Lasser's group proposes that the FDA raise its threshold for approving
new drugs when safe and effective alternatives exist or if the targeted
condition is benign. They also recommend that physicians avoid using newly
approved drugs when possible, and when that is not feasible, that patients be
monitored for hepatic, hematologic and cardiac toxicity.
In an interview with Reuters Health, Dr. Lasser expounded on this theme.
"More studies have to be done before drugs are released and millions of
patients are exposed," she said.
She reminded physicians that patients in clinical trials are not
representative of the population that may ultimately be exposed to the drug,
such as elderly individuals, children and those with comorbid conditions. "The
testing needs to be superior to what is out there now," she emphasized.
Drs. Temple and Himmel, based in Rockville, Maryland, defend the FDA's
handling of new drugs. For example, they point out, rare adverse effects are
unlikely to be uncovered in premarketing trials. In addition, many labeling
changes are associated with antineoplastic agents and antiviral drugs, all of
which are expected to have substantial toxicity.
They note that the FDA has updated its requirements of manufacturers in
light of past adverse events. Drugs are now evaluated thoroughly for their
effect on cardiac repolarization, hepatotoxicity, and ability to inhibit
hepatic enzymes that interact with other drugs.
"If there is sound reason to use a recently approved drug, the physician
need not deny the patient this treatment," they write.
JAMA 2002;287:2215-2220,2273-2275.
ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND
MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR
OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING
MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN
IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN
CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.
"A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth."
-- Albert Einstein, letter to a friend, 1901
"I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education."
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William C. Jarvis, September 28, 1820
"What's the point of vaccination if it doesn't protect you from the unvaccinated?"
-- Sandy Gottstein
"Who gets to decide what the greater good is and how many will be sacrificed to it?"