You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 282 No. 24, December 22, 1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 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 (5)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Safety of FDA-Approved Drugs

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: Dr Friedman and colleagues1 downplayed serious safety questions about dexfenfluramine, mibefradil, and bromfenac sodium, which were approved in 1996-1997 and subsequently removed from the market, that were raised prior to marketing. Furthermore, Friedman et al failed to acknowledge that these drugs did not represent significant advances over the numerous approved drugs in their therapeutic categories.

For example, data from congestive heart failure trials presented at a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Advisory Committee meeting on mibefradil suggested that more patients treated with mibefradil died than those taking placebo.2 Several committee members voted against approval. The drug, the ninth calcium channel blocker approved in the United States, has since been removed from the market because of life-threatening arrhythmias from drug interactions.3

The FDA medical officer reviewing bromfenac sodium, the 20th nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) approved in the United States, unsuccessfully advocated a black box warning label as a . . . [Full Text of this Article]



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

RELATED ARTICLE

The Safety of Newly Approved Medicines: Do Recent Market Removals Mean There Is a Problem?
Michael A. Friedman, Janet Woodcock, Murray M. Lumpkin, Jeffrey E. Shuren, Arthur E. Hass, and Larry J. Thompson
JAMA. 1999;281(18):1728-1734.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

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  

Timing of New Black Box Warnings and Withdrawals for Prescription Medications
Lasser et al.
JAMA 2002;287:2215-2220.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1999 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.