This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (98)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Quality of Care  • Patient Safety/ Medical Error  • Drug Therapy  • Drug Therapy, Other  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Do Recent Market Removals Mean There Is a Problem?

Michael A. Friedman, MD; Janet Woodcock, MD; Murray M. Lumpkin, MD; Jeffrey E. Shuren, MD, JD; Arthur E. Hass; Larry J. Thompson, MS

JAMA. 1999;281:1728-1734.

The removal of 5 pharmaceuticals from the market in a 12-month period because of unexpected adverse events raised concerns about the adequacy of the drug review process at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Specifically, concerns were raised about improvements in drug review efficiency that significantly reduced FDA review times. We have reviewed the circumstances of the 5 removals to determine whether there was any relationship to the increased efficiencies in the drug review process. When the removed drugs were analyzed by date of approval, no increase in the number of drugs taken off the market was seen, demonstrating that reduced review processing time was not the reason for the cluster of removals. We conclude that the agency's drug review procedures and postmarketing surveillance system after a drug has been marketed are currently adequate but must continually adjust to future challenges.

Author Affiliations: Office of the Commissioner (Dr Friedman), Center for Drug Research and Evaluation (Drs Woodcock and Lumpkin), Office of Policy, (Dr Shuren), Office of Performance Evaluation, (Mr Hass), and Office of Public Affairs (Mr thompson), Office of the Commissioner, The US Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Md.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Balancing Randomized Trials With Anecdote
Phillips
ANN INTERN MED 2009;150:885-886.
FULL TEXT  

Statistical methods in pharmacoepidemiology: advances and challenges
Suissa
Stat Methods Med Res 2009;18:3-6.
 

Congress Responds to the IOM Drug Safety Report In Full
Psaty and Korn
JAMA 2007;298:2185-2187.
FULL TEXT  

Cardiovascular safety of drugs not intended for cardiovascular use: need for a new conceptual basis for assessment and approval
Borer et al.
Eur Heart J 2007;28:1904-1909.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Effect of Pharmacotherapy Audit Meetings on Early New Drug Prescribing by General Practitioners
Florentinus et al.
The Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2007;41:319-324.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The FDA and drug safety: a proposal for sweeping changes.
Furberg et al.
Arch Intern Med 2006;166:1938-1942.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Clinical Trials in the Wake of Vioxx: Requiring Statistically Extreme Evidence of Benefit to Ensure the Safety of New Drugs
Roth-Cline
Circulation 2006;113:2253-2259.
FULL TEXT  

The Patents-Based Pharmaceutical Development Process: Rationale, Problems, and Potential Reforms
Barton and Emanuel
JAMA 2005;294:2075-2082.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Drug withdrawals from the Canadian market for safety reasons, 1963-2004
Lexchin
CMAJ 2005;172:765-767.
FULL TEXT  

Responding to the Rofecoxib Withdrawal Crisis: A New Model for Notifying Patients at Risk and Their Health Care Providers
Jain et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2005;142:182-186.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Today's FDA
Slater
NEJM 2005;352:293-297.
FULL TEXT  

Potential for Conflict of Interest in the Evaluation of Suspected Adverse Drug Reactions: Use of Cerivastatin and Risk of Rhabdomyolysis
Psaty et al.
JAMA 2004;292:2622-2631.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Collecting and sharing information about harms
Pirmohamed and Darbyshire
BMJ 2004;329:6-7.
FULL TEXT  

Managing Delegation in the FDA: Reducing Delay in New-Drug Review
Olson
Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 2004;29:397-430.
ABSTRACT  

Gaps, Tensions, and Conflicts in the FDA Approval Process: Implications for Clinical Practice
Deyo
J Am Board Fam Med 2004;17:142-149.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Canadian and US Drug Approval Times and Safety Considerations
Rawson and Kaitin
The Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2003;37:1403-1408.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Emergent Patterns in the Regulation of Pharmaceuticals: Institutions and Interests in the United States, Canada, Britain, and France
Wiktorowicz
Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 2003;28:615-658.
ABSTRACT  

Principles From Clinical Trials Relevant to Clinical Practice: Part I
Califf and DeMets
Circulation 2002;106:1015-1021.
FULL TEXT  

Changing the Status of Drugs from Prescription to Over-the-Counter Availability
Brass
NEJM 2001;345:810-816.
FULL TEXT  

Drug-Related Adverse Events: A Readers' Guide to Assessing Literature Reviews and Meta-analyses
Ross
Arch Intern Med 2001;161:1041-1046.
FULL TEXT  

From the Clinics to the Courts: The Role Evidence Should Play in Litigating Medical Care
Morreim
Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 2001;26:409-428.
 

In Defense of Case Reports and Case Series
Vandenbroucke
ANN INTERN MED 2001;134:330-334.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura and Clopidogrel -- A Need for New Approaches to Drug Safety
Wood
NEJM 2000;342:1824-1826.
FULL TEXT  

Safety of FDA-Approved Drugs
Lurie et al.
JAMA 1999;282:2297-2298.
FULL TEXT  

The Safety of New Medicines: The Importance of Asking the Right Questions
Wood
JAMA 1999;281:1753-1754.
FULL TEXT