Patient safety in the use of our medicines is a top priority for GSK. We have consistently shared our data on AVANDIA with the FDA and other regulatory agencies and continue to work closely with these agencies to update the AVANDIA label as appropriate so that health care professionals can make treatment decisions in the best interests of their patients.
Hmmm.....k. Now we go to the June 2nd New York Times:
When a Congressional committee holds a hearing next Wednesday, the subject will be the safety of the diabetes drug Avandia and whether federal drug regulators have paid close enough attention to its potential risks.
But for one witness who is scheduled to appear, Dr. John B. Buse, a nationally noted diabetes specialist, the hearing will take a different turn, focusing on whether he was the target of an effort by the drug’s maker, GlaxoSmithKline, to silence his criticism of the drug.
In a statement last night, Dr. Buse said his full story would be told at the hearing, including the account of how he was intimidated by Glaxo.
Congressional investigators have been looking into what they have called “very serious” claims that Avandia’s maker “silenced one or more medical professionals who attempted to speak out about the potential for cardiovascular problems with Avandia,” according to a letter to Glaxo last week from the Senate Finance Committee.
You have to give GSK some credit. They didn't lie in that health care professional letter. Read it closely. It says patient safety is "a" top priority, not "the" top priority for the company. The top priority of course the appreciation of the stock price of GSK, which evidently has some very good lawyers writing letters for them. I hope those lawyers never see this blog.
GSK isn't all about intimidation and ball-busting though. back to the article:
About five years ago, Dr. Anne L. Peters, said, she helped change the formulary — or list of preferred drugs — for Los Angeles County so that patients in her clinic would get prescriptions for Actos rather than Avandia.
“The Avandia people, it was just so surprising, they asked me what I wanted to keep Avandia on the formulary,” Dr. Peters said, recounting events that occurred sometime in the 2000-to-2002 period. “They asked me, “What can we give you that will have you keep it on the formulary?’ ”
Dr. Peters said that she asked the company to establish a database at the clinic that would track the outcomes of patients on both drugs.
When she asked for the database, which would have cost several thousand dollars, she said, a company representative replied: “That’s all you want? Other doctors ask to go to the Caribbean.”
GSK never did fund the database, knowing full well that sending doctors to the Caribbean advances their commitment to health care professionals being able to make treatment decisions in the best interests of their patients far better than tracking outcomes of actual patients.
Special note to GSK; I can be had for far less than a trip to the Caribbean.
2 comments:
It seems you're riding GSK pretty hard here;
The major problems with the drug - elevated LDL increasing risk for MI and increasing volume expansion in CHF pt's - were well documented before the release of this study and prescribers WERE aware of these risks in the pt. populations.
The study, you have to concede, was poorly done - funded by every other drug company almost - and did not include every trial that was available. Trials where patients did not die were not included, it's even stated so on the original article.
It's hugely media sensationalism - docs are keeping their patients on avandia and pharmacists are telling them these risks were known beforehand. I know GSK is a POS, but this is the media's fault here.
Oh my god, I thought you made up the Caribbean quote! Not that I'm really shocked, mind you.
My answer would have been "I want to see the storage facility where GSK keeps your souls. I'm interested in what sort of container a soul requires. Amber glass, yes?"
Post a Comment