|
|
NEWS
RECALLS
COMPLAINT FORM
SCAM ALERTS
RESOURCES
Small Claims Guide Class Actions Lemon Laws FAQ Newsletters |
|
| Automotive Education Employment Electronics Family Finance Health Homeowners Insurance Pets Shopping Travel |
|
|
|
![]() |
Lung Cancer Drug Under Fire |
||||||||
|
March 4, 2005
In a petition that seeks to have the drug pulled from the market, and in testimony delivered to the FDA's Advisory Committee on Oncologic Drugs, Public Citizen said that Iressa should be reclassified as an experimental drug. Iressa was approved in May 2003 under an accelerated approval program. Because it had been demonstrated only to reduce tumor size, its approval was conditioned on the manufacturer, AstraZeneca, studying the drug further to determine whether it prolonged survival. That study has been done; patients taking Iressa didn't live any longer than patients taking a placebo. Rather than pull the drug, however, as the FDA has the authority to do under the accelerated approval process, the agency merely advised patients to consider taking one of two other drugs that - unlike Iressa - have been proven effective in prolonging survival. Further, Iressa has been linked to deaths. In January, Japanese scientists linked Iressa to a total of 1,473 adverse events and 588 deaths in that country. In addition, according to a Public Citizen analysis of the FDA's adverse event reactions database, there have been 144 reports of acute interstitial pneumonia in patients taking the drug between May 2003 and September 2004, including 87 deaths for which Iressa was suspected to be the cause. The continued use of Iressa "puts all patients at risk for a serious and potentially fatal lung disease that is occurring with a relatively high incidence," said Dr. Peter Lurie, deputy director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group. "Leaving Iressa on the market increases the likelihood that patients will be diverted from an effective therapy to an ineffective therapy, endangering their lives. Keeping a drug on the market while effectively telling people to avoid taking it is not an adequate public health response." Report Your Experience
|
||||||||
Back to the top | |
|||||||||
Advertisement
|
|
Custom Search
|
||||
|
AUTOMOTIVE Dealers Manufacturers Service Extended Warranties Lemon Laws Recalls Tires Transporters FAMILY Aging Children, Parenting Recalls Dating Education Entertainment Pets Weddings |
FINANCE Annuities Banks Credit Cards Debt Collection Debt Counseling Insurance Investing Loans Mortgages Payday Loans Student Loans Tax Prep HEALTH Doctors Drugs, Pharmacies Health Clubs Hearing Care Hospitals Nursing Homes Nutrition, Diets Vision Care Weight Loss |
HOUSE & HOME Appliances Cookware Furniture Home Improvements Lawn & Garden Movers Pools & Spas Realtors, Rental Agents Recalls Utilities ELECTRONICS Cable TV/DBS Cameras Cell Phones Computers Home Electronics Internet Access Local Phone Service Long Distance VoIP |
SHOPPING Delivery Services In-Home Online Retail Stores Sporting Goods Supermarkets Telemarketers TRAVEL Airlines Bus Lines Car Rental Cruises Hotels Travel Agents Trains RESOURCES Class Actions Complaint Form Small Claims Guide Lemon Laws |
CONSUMER NEWS Latest News Automotive Telecom Financial Health Homeowners Scams Seniors Travel More ... RECALLS Automotive Children's Products Drugs Food Household Products Sporting Goods ABOUT US FAQ Privacy Policy Advertise With Us Newsroom Syndication Terms of Use |
Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use
Copyright © 2010 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. All Rights Reserved. The contents of this site may not be republished, reprinted, rewritten or recirculated without written permission. |
|