Jump to content

Rosiglitazone: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Truebreath (talk | contribs)
3,545 edits
consistent citation formatting
Line 62: Line 62:
}}
}}


'''Rosiglitazone''' (trade name '''Avandia''', [[GlaxoSmithKline]]) is an [[antidiabetic drug]] in the [[thiazolidinedione]] class of drugs. It works as an [[insulin]] sensitizer, by binding to the [[PPAR]] receptors in fat cells and making the cells more responsive to insulin. It is marketed by the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) as a stand-alone drug or for use in combination with [[metformin]] or with [[glimepiride]]. First released in 1999, annual sales peaked at approximately $2.5-billion in 2006; however, following a [[meta-analysis]] published in the [[New England Journal of Medicine]] in 2007 that linked the drug's use to an increased risk of [[Myocardial infarction|heart attack]],<ref>{{cite journal|last=Nissen|first=SE|coauthors=Wolski, K|title=Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes.|journal=The New England Journal of Medicine|date=Jun 14, 2007|volume=356|issue=24|pages=2457–71|pmid=17517853|doi=10.1056/NEJMoa072761}}</ref> sales plummeted to just $9.5-million in 2012. The drug's patent expired in 2012.<ref>{{cite patent|US|5002953}}</ref>
'''Rosiglitazone''' (trade name '''Avandia''', [[GlaxoSmithKline]]) is an [[antidiabetic drug]] in the [[thiazolidinedione]] class of drugs. It works as an [[insulin]] sensitizer, by binding to the [[PPAR]] receptors in fat cells and making the cells more responsive to insulin. It is marketed by the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) as a stand-alone drug or for use in combination with [[metformin]] or with [[glimepiride]]. First released in 1999, annual sales peaked at approximately $2.5-billion in 2006; however, following a [[meta-analysis]] published in the [[New England Journal of Medicine]] in 2007 that linked the drug's use to an increased risk of [[Myocardial infarction|heart attack]],<ref name="pmid17517853">{{cite journal | author = Nissen SE, Wolski K | title = Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes | journal = N. Engl. J. Med. | volume = 356 | issue = 24 | pages = 2457–71 | year = 2007 | pmid = 17517853 | doi = 10.1056/NEJMoa072761 }}</ref> sales plummeted to just $9.5-million in 2012. The drug's patent expired in 2012.<ref>{{cite patent|US|5002953}}</ref>


Despite rosiglitazone's effectiveness at decreasing blood sugar in [[type 2 diabetes mellitus]], its use decreased dramatically as studies showed apparent associations with increased risks of heart attacks and death.<ref name="Chen2012">{{cite journal|last=Chen|first=X|coauthors=Yang, L; Zhai, SD|title=Risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality among diabetic patients prescribed rosiglitazone or pioglitazone: a meta-analysis of retrospective cohort studies.|journal=Chinese medical journal|date=December 2012|volume=125|issue=23|pages=4301–6|pmid=23217404}}</ref> Adverse effects alleged to be caused by rosiglitazone were the subject of over 13,000 lawsuits against GSK;<ref name="bloomberg.com">http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-09/glaxo-withheld-avandia-study-former-fda-manager-said-to-testify-in-suit.html</ref> as of July 2010, GSK had agreed to settlements on more than 11,500 of these suits.
Despite rosiglitazone's effectiveness at decreasing blood sugar in [[type 2 diabetes mellitus]], its use decreased dramatically as studies showed apparent associations with increased risks of heart attacks and death.<ref name="Chen2012">{{cite journal | author = Chen X, Yang L, Zhai SD | title = Risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality among diabetic patients prescribed rosiglitazone or pioglitazone: a meta-analysis of retrospective cohort studies | journal = Chin. Med. J. | volume = 125 | issue = 23 | pages = 4301–6 | year = 2012 | pmid = 23217404 | doi = }}</ref> Adverse effects alleged to be caused by rosiglitazone were the subject of over 13,000 lawsuits against GSK;<ref name="bloomberg.com">http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-09/glaxo-withheld-avandia-study-former-fda-manager-said-to-testify-in-suit.html</ref> as of July 2010, GSK had agreed to settlements on more than 11,500 of these suits.


Some reviewers recommended rosiglitazone be taken off the market, but an [[Food and Drug Administration|FDA]] panel disagreed, and it remains available in the U.S.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/20/health/policy/20avandia.html | title = Controversial Diabetes Drug Harms Heart, U.S. Concludes | author = Gardiner Harris | publisher = ''New York Times'' | date = February 19, 2010}}</ref> From November 2011 until November 2013, the federal government did not allow Avandia to be sold without a prescription from a certified doctor; moreover, patients were required to be informed of the risks associated with its use, and the drug had to be purchased by mail order through specified pharmacies.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://yourlife.usatoday.com/health/medical/heartdisease/story/2011/05/Diabetes-drug-Avandia-to-be-pulled-from-retail-shelves/47316450/1?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29 | work=USA Today | title=Most Popular E-mail Newsletter | date=2011-05-24}}</ref> In November 2013, the FDA lifted its earlier restrictions on rosiglitazone after reviewing the results of the RECORD clinical trial (a six-year, open label [[randomized control trial]]), which failed to show the heart infact risks associated with the drug.<ref name="Glaxo’s Avandia Cleared From Sales Restrictions by FDA">http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-25/glaxo-s-avandia-cleared-from-sales-restrictions-by-fda.html</ref><ref>{{cite news| url = http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm376516.htm | title = FDA requires removal of certain restrictions on the diabetes drug Avandia | date = November 25, 2013 | author = U.S. Food and Drug Administration | authorlink = Food and Drug Administration }}</ref>
Some reviewers recommended rosiglitazone be taken off the market, but an [[Food and Drug Administration|FDA]] panel disagreed, and it remains available in the U.S.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/20/health/policy/20avandia.html | title = Controversial Diabetes Drug Harms Heart, U.S. Concludes | author = Gardiner Harris | publisher = ''New York Times'' | date = February 19, 2010}}</ref> From November 2011 until November 2013, the federal government did not allow Avandia to be sold without a prescription from a certified doctor; moreover, patients were required to be informed of the risks associated with its use, and the drug had to be purchased by mail order through specified pharmacies.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://yourlife.usatoday.com/health/medical/heartdisease/story/2011/05/Diabetes-drug-Avandia-to-be-pulled-from-retail-shelves/47316450/1?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29 | work=USA Today | title=Most Popular E-mail Newsletter | date=2011-05-24}}</ref> In November 2013, the FDA lifted its earlier restrictions on rosiglitazone after reviewing the results of the RECORD clinical trial (a six-year, open label [[randomized control trial]]), which failed to show the heart infact risks associated with the drug.<ref name="Glaxo’s Avandia Cleared From Sales Restrictions by FDA">http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-25/glaxo-s-avandia-cleared-from-sales-restrictions-by-fda.html</ref><ref>{{cite news| url = http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm376516.htm | title = FDA requires removal of certain restrictions on the diabetes drug Avandia | date = November 25, 2013 | author = U.S. Food and Drug Administration | authorlink = Food and Drug Administration }}</ref>
Line 72: Line 72:


==Medical uses==
==Medical uses==
While once commonly used in [[type 2 diabetes]] rosiglitazone has not been found to improve outcomes and likely worsens them. So there is no evidence that patient-oriented outcomes like mortality, morbidity, adverse effects, costs and health-related quality of life are positively influenced by this compound. Glycemic control measured by glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) as a surrogate endpoint did not demonstrate clinically relevant differences to other oral antidiabetic drugs.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Richter|first=B|coauthors=Bandeira-Echtler, E; Bergerhoff, K; Clar, C; Ebrahim, SH|title=Rosiglitazone for type 2 diabetes mellitus.|journal=The Cochrane database of systematic reviews|date=Jul 18, 2007|issue=3|pages=CD006063|pmid=17636824|doi=10.1002/14651858.CD006063.pub2}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Selvin|first=E|coauthors=Bolen, S; Yeh, HC; Wiley, C; Wilson, LM; Marinopoulos, SS; Feldman, L; Vassy, J; Wilson, R; Bass, EB; Brancati, FL|title=Cardiovascular outcomes in trials of oral diabetes medications: a systematic review.|journal=Archives of Internal Medicine|date=Oct 27, 2008|volume=168|issue=19|pages=2070–80|pmid=18955635|doi=10.1001/archinte.168.19.2070|pmc=2765722}}</ref>
While once commonly used in [[type 2 diabetes]] rosiglitazone has not been found to improve outcomes and likely worsens them. So there is no evidence that patient-oriented outcomes like mortality, morbidity, adverse effects, costs and health-related quality of life are positively influenced by this compound. Glycemic control measured by glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) as a surrogate endpoint did not demonstrate clinically relevant differences to other oral antidiabetic drugs.<ref name="pmid17636824">{{cite journal | author = Richter B, Bandeira-Echtler E, Bergerhoff K, Clar C, Ebrahim SH | title = Rosiglitazone for type 2 diabetes mellitus | journal = Cochrane Database Syst Rev | volume = | issue = 3 | pages = CD006063 | year = 2007 | pmid = 17636824 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD006063.pub2 }}</ref><ref name="pmid18955635">{{cite journal | author = Selvin E, Bolen S, Yeh HC, Wiley C, Wilson LM, Marinopoulos SS, Feldman L, Vassy J, Wilson R, Bass EB, Brancati FL | title = Cardiovascular outcomes in trials of oral diabetes medications: a systematic review | journal = Arch. Intern. Med. | volume = 168 | issue = 19 | pages = 2070–80 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18955635 | pmc = 2765722 | doi = 10.1001/archinte.168.19.2070 }}</ref>


== Adverse effects ==
== Adverse effects ==


===Heart infarction and heart failure===
===Heart infarction and heart failure===
A [[meta-analysis]] in May 2007 reported the use of rosiglitazone was associated with an increased risk of [[myocardial infarction|heart attack]] ([[odds ratio]] = 1.43, 95% [[confidence interval]], 1.03 to 1.98; P=0.03), and a higher (but non-significant) increase in risk of death from all cardiovascular diseases (odds ratio = 1.64, 95% [[confidence interval]], 0.98 to 2.74; P=0.06).<ref>{{cite journal |author=Nissen SE, Wolski K |title=Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes |journal=N. Engl. J. Med. |volume=356 |issue=24 |pages=2457–71 |date=June 2007 |pmid=17517853 |doi=10.1056/NEJMoa072761 |laysummary=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18783816 |laysource=Associated Press |laydate=May 21, 2007}}</ref>
A [[meta-analysis]] in May 2007 reported the use of rosiglitazone was associated with an increased risk of [[myocardial infarction|heart attack]] ([[odds ratio]] = 1.43, 95% [[confidence interval]], 1.03 to 1.98; P=0.03), and a higher (but non-significant) increase in risk of death from all cardiovascular diseases (odds ratio = 1.64, 95% [[confidence interval]], 0.98 to 2.74; P=0.06).<ref name="pmid17517853">{{cite journal | author = Nissen SE, Wolski K | title = Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes | journal = N. Engl. J. Med. | volume = 356 | issue = 24 | pages = 2457–71 | year = 2007 | month = June | pmid = 17517853 | doi = 10.1056/NEJMoa072761 | laysummary = http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18783816 | laysource = Associated Press | laydate = May 21, 2007 }}</ref>

The U.S. [[Food and Drug Administration]] (FDA) issued an alert on May 21, 2007.<ref>{{cite news| url = http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2007/NEW01636.html | title = FDA Issues Safety Alert on Avandia | date = May 21, 2007 | author = U.S. Food and Drug Administration | authorlink = Food and Drug Administration }}</ref> On July 30, 2007, an Advisory Committee of the [[Food and Drug Administration]] concluded the use of rosiglitazone for the treatment of [[type 2 diabetes]] was associated with a greater risk of [[ischemic heart disease|myocardial ischemic events]] (including heart attacks) than a placebo, but data from several long term, prospective clinical trials showed when rosiglitazone was compared to [[metformin]], or [[sulfonylurea]], there was no difference in the risk of heart attack. These data, coupled with the meta-analysis, prompted the FDA to state the data on the association between rosiglitazone and myocardial ischemia were inconclusive. The meta-analysis was not supported by an interim analysis of the trial designed to evaluate this, and several other reports have failed to resolve the controversy.
The U.S. [[Food and Drug Administration]] (FDA) issued an alert on May 21, 2007.<ref>{{cite news| url = http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2007/NEW01636.html | title = FDA Issues Safety Alert on Avandia | date = May 21, 2007 | author = U.S. Food and Drug Administration | authorlink = Food and Drug Administration }}</ref> On July 30, 2007, an Advisory Committee of the [[Food and Drug Administration]] concluded the use of rosiglitazone for the treatment of [[type 2 diabetes]] was associated with a greater risk of [[ischemic heart disease|myocardial ischemic events]] (including heart attacks) than a placebo, but data from several long term, prospective clinical trials showed when rosiglitazone was compared to [[metformin]], or [[sulfonylurea]], there was no difference in the risk of heart attack. These data, coupled with the meta-analysis, prompted the FDA to state the data on the association between rosiglitazone and myocardial ischemia were inconclusive. The meta-analysis was not supported by an interim analysis of the trial designed to evaluate this, and several other reports have failed to resolve the controversy.


At the same time, a report by the [[United States Senate Committee on Finance|Senate Finance Committee]] accused GlaxoSmithKline of knowing about the drug's risks well before they became public. The report also criticized the FDA for letting [[clinical trial]]s continue, despite 83,000 heart attacks from 1999 to 2007 that the FDA linked to rosiglitazone. This Senate Committee report from November 2007 is entitled "The Intimidation of Dr. John Buse and the Diabetes Drug Avandia". The title refers to (temporarily successful) efforts made by GSK beginning in 1999 to intimidate an academic scientist from continuing to suggest Avandia had cardiovascular risk. The drug now bears a [[boxed warning]] about exactly this risk. GlaxoSmithKline maintains the drug is safe and the Senate report did not consider scientific evidence or the company's efforts to make known its concerns to the parties involved. However, the FDA still recommends patients continue taking it unless their doctors tell them otherwise.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/diabetes-drug-avandia-targeted-fda-reviewers-safety/story?id=9914308|title=Diabetes Drug Avandia Targeted By Reviewers on Safety|work=[[ABC News]]|date=2010-02-23}}</ref><ref name=fallout/>
At the same time, a report by the [[United States Senate Committee on Finance|Senate Finance Committee]] accused GlaxoSmithKline of knowing about the drug's risks well before they became public. The report also criticized the FDA for letting [[clinical trial]]s continue, despite 83,000 heart attacks from 1999 to 2007 that the FDA linked to rosiglitazone. This Senate Committee report from November 2007 is entitled "The Intimidation of Dr. John Buse and the Diabetes Drug Avandia". The title refers to (temporarily successful) efforts made by GSK beginning in 1999 to intimidate an academic scientist from continuing to suggest Avandia had cardiovascular risk. The drug now bears a [[boxed warning]] about exactly this risk. GlaxoSmithKline maintains the drug is safe and the Senate report did not consider scientific evidence or the company's efforts to make known its concerns to the parties involved. However, the FDA still recommends patients continue taking it unless their doctors tell them otherwise.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/diabetes-drug-avandia-targeted-fda-reviewers-safety/story?id=9914308|title=Diabetes Drug Avandia Targeted By Reviewers on Safety|work=[[ABC News]]|date=2010-02-23}}</ref><ref name=fallout/>


In February 2010, [[David Graham (epidemiologist)|David Graham]], the FDA's associate director of drug safety, recommended rosiglitazone be taken off the market. In June 2010, Graham ''et al''., published a retrospective study of 227,571 elderly American patients, comparing roziglitazone to pioglitazone, the other thiazolidinedione marketed in the United States. The authors concluded rosiglitazone was associated with "an increased risk of stroke, heart failure, and all-cause mortality and an increased risk of the composite of AMI, stroke, heart failure, or all-cause mortality in patients 65 years or older".<ref>{{cite journal |author=Graham DJ, Ouellet-Hellstrom R, MaCurdy TE, ''et al.'' |title=Risk of acute myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and death in elderly Medicare patients treated with rosiglitazone or pioglitazone |journal=JAMA |volume=304 |issue=4 |pages=411–8 |date=July 2010 |pmid=20584880 |doi=10.1001/jama.2010.920}}</ref> The [[number needed to harm]] with roziglitazone was sixty. Graham argued rosiglitazone caused 500 more heart attacks and 300 more heart failures than its main competitor.
In February 2010, [[David Graham (epidemiologist)|David Graham]], the FDA's associate director of drug safety, recommended rosiglitazone be taken off the market. In June 2010, Graham ''et al''., published a retrospective study of 227,571 elderly American patients, comparing roziglitazone to pioglitazone, the other thiazolidinedione marketed in the United States. The authors concluded rosiglitazone was associated with "an increased risk of stroke, heart failure, and all-cause mortality and an increased risk of the composite of AMI, stroke, heart failure, or all-cause mortality in patients 65 years or older".<ref name="pmid20584880">{{cite journal | author = Graham DJ, Ouellet-Hellstrom R, MaCurdy TE, Ali F, Sholley C, Worrall C, Kelman JA | title = Risk of acute myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and death in elderly Medicare patients treated with rosiglitazone or pioglitazone | journal = JAMA | volume = 304 | issue = 4 | pages = 411–8 | year = 2010 | pmid = 20584880 | doi = 10.1001/jama.2010.920 }}</ref> The [[number needed to harm]] with roziglitazone was sixty. Graham argued rosiglitazone caused 500 more heart attacks and 300 more heart failures than its main competitor.


The controversy over adverse effects has dramatically reduced the use of rosiglitazone.<ref name=Ajjan>{{cite journal |author=Ajjan RA, Grant PJ |title=The cardiovascular safety of rosiglitazone |journal=Expert Opin Drug Saf |volume=7 |issue=4 |pages=367–76 |date=July 2008 |pmid=18613801 |doi=10.1517/14740338.7.4.367}}</ref> No studies have shown that rosiglitazone reduces the risk of stroke, amputation, heart attack, blindness, neuropathy or renal failure.
The controversy over adverse effects has dramatically reduced the use of rosiglitazone.<ref name=Ajjan>{{cite journal | author = Ajjan RA, Grant PJ | title = The cardiovascular safety of rosiglitazone | journal = Expert Opin Drug Saf | volume = 7 | issue = 4 | pages = 367–76 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18613801 | doi = 10.1517/14740338.7.4.367 }}</ref> No studies have shown that rosiglitazone reduces the risk of stroke, amputation, heart attack, blindness, neuropathy or renal failure.


An updated meta analysis of 56 trials released in 2010, including the open label Record trial from 2009, found again an increased risk for heart infarction against control, but not for cardiovascular death.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Nissen|first=SE|coauthors=Wolski, K|title=Rosiglitazone revisited: an updated meta-analysis of risk for myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality.|journal=Archives of internal medicine|date=2010 Jul 26|volume=170|issue=14|pages=1191-1201|doi=10.1001/archinternmed.2010.207|pmid=20656674|accessdate=27 March 2014}}</ref> Another meta analysis from 2010 found only a higher risk of heart failure, mostly when rosiglitazone was administered as add-on therapy to insulin. It included more trials, but also trials with short duration.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Mannucci|first=Edoardo|coauthors=Monami, Matteo; Di Bari, Mauro; Lamanna, Caterina; Gori, Francesca; Gensini, Gian Franco; Marchionni, Niccolò|title=Cardiac safety profile of rosiglitazone|journal=International Journal of Cardiology|date=August 2010|volume=143|issue=2|pages=135–140|doi=10.1016/j.ijcard.2009.01.064}}</ref>
An updated meta analysis of 56 trials released in 2010, including the open label Record trial from 2009, found again an increased risk for heart infarction against control, but not for cardiovascular death.<ref name="pmid20656674">{{cite journal | author = Nissen SE, Wolski K | title = Rosiglitazone revisited: an updated meta-analysis of risk for myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality | journal = Arch. Intern. Med. | volume = 170 | issue = 14 | pages = 1191–1201 | year = 2010 | pmid = 20656674 | doi = 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.207 }}</ref> Another meta analysis from 2010 found only a higher risk of heart failure, mostly when rosiglitazone was administered as add-on therapy to insulin. It included more trials, but also trials with short duration.<ref name="pmid19328563">{{cite journal | author = Mannucci E, Monami M, Di Bari M, Lamanna C, Gori F, Gensini GF, Marchionni N | title = Cardiac safety profile of rosiglitazone: a comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials | journal = Int. J. Cardiol. | volume = 143 | issue = 2 | pages = 135–40 | year = 2010 | pmid = 19328563 | doi = 10.1016/j.ijcard.2009.01.064 }}</ref>


A meta-analysis of observational studies released in March, 2011, provides more evidence that rosiglitazone is associated with a higher risk of heart failure, [[myocardial infarction]] and death than a similar agent, pioglitazone in real life. The meta-analysis had 16 observational studies involving 810 000 patients taking rosiglitazone or [[pioglitazone]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=Loke|first=Yoon Kong|coauthors=Chun Shing Kwok, Sonal Singh|title=Comparative cardiovascular effects of thiazolidinediones: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies|journal=BMJ|volume=2011;342:d1309|doi=10.1136/bmj.d1309|accessdate=27 March 2014}}</ref> <ref>{{cite web|last=Hughes|first=Sue|title=More damning data on rosiglitazone|url=http://www.theheart.org/article/1199863.do|publisher=theheart.org|accessdate=6 April 2011|date=27 March 2011}}</ref>This was confirmed by another meta-analysis on 8 retrospective cohort studies, most in the US.<ref name=Chen2012/>
A meta-analysis of observational studies released in March, 2011, provides more evidence that rosiglitazone is associated with a higher risk of heart failure, [[myocardial infarction]] and death than a similar agent, pioglitazone in real life. The meta-analysis had 16 observational studies involving 810 000 patients taking rosiglitazone or [[pioglitazone]].<ref name="pmid21415101">{{cite journal | author = Loke YK, Kwok CS, Singh S | title = Comparative cardiovascular effects of thiazolidinediones: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies | journal = BMJ | volume = 342 | issue = | pages = d1309 | year = 2011 | pmid = 21415101 | pmc = 3230110 | doi = 10.1136/bmj.d1309 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web| author = Hughes S | title = More damning data on rosiglitazone | url = http://www.theheart.org/article/1199863.do|publisher=theheart.org | access date = 6 April 2011 | date = 27 March 2011 }}</ref> This was confirmed by another meta-analysis on 8 retrospective cohort studies, most in the US.<ref name=Chen2012/>


===Stroke===
===Stroke===
Line 95: Line 96:
===Bone fractures===
===Bone fractures===
GlaxoSmithKline reported a greater incidence of [[fracture]]s of the upper arms, hands and feet in female diabetics given rosiglitazone compared with those given metformin or [[glyburide]].<ref>Cobitz, Alexander R (February 2007). {{PDFlink|[http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/safety/2007/Avandia_GSK_Ltr.pdf Clinical Trial Observation of an Increased Incidence of Fractures in Female Patients Who Received Long-Term Treatment with Avandia (rosiglitazone maleate) Tablets for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus]|49.9&nbsp;[[Kibibyte|KiB]]<!-- application/pdf, 51185 bytes -->}}. [[GlaxoSmithKline]]. Retrieved on 10 April 2007.</ref>
GlaxoSmithKline reported a greater incidence of [[fracture]]s of the upper arms, hands and feet in female diabetics given rosiglitazone compared with those given metformin or [[glyburide]].<ref>Cobitz, Alexander R (February 2007). {{PDFlink|[http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/safety/2007/Avandia_GSK_Ltr.pdf Clinical Trial Observation of an Increased Incidence of Fractures in Female Patients Who Received Long-Term Treatment with Avandia (rosiglitazone maleate) Tablets for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus]|49.9&nbsp;[[Kibibyte|KiB]]<!-- application/pdf, 51185 bytes -->}}. [[GlaxoSmithKline]]. Retrieved on 10 April 2007.</ref>
The information was based on data from the ADOPT trial.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Kahn SE, Haffner SM, Heise MA, ''et al.'' |title=Glycemic durability of rosiglitazone, metformin, or glyburide monotherapy |journal=N. Engl. J. Med. |volume=355 |issue=23 |pages=2427–43 |date=December 2006 |pmid=17145742 |doi=10.1056/NEJMoa066224}}</ref> The same increase has been found with pioglitazone (Actos), another TZD.
The information was based on data from the ADOPT trial<ref name="pmid17145742">{{cite journal | author = Kahn SE, Haffner SM, Heise MA, Herman WH, Holman RR, Jones NP, Kravitz BG, Lachin JM, O'Neill MC, Zinman B, Viberti G | title = Glycemic durability of rosiglitazone, metformin, or glyburide monotherapy | journal = N. Engl. J. Med. | volume = 355 | issue = 23 | pages = 2427–43 | year = 2006 | pmid = 17145742 | doi = 10.1056/NEJMoa066224 }}</ref> The same increase has been found with pioglitazone (Actos), another TZD.


===Eye damage===
===Eye damage===
Both rosiglitazone and pioglitazone have been suspected of causing [[macular edema]], which damages the retina of the eye and causes partial blindness. Blindness is also a possible effect of diabetes, which rosiglitazone is intended to treat. One report<ref>{{cite journal |author=Kendall C, Wooltorton E |title=Rosiglitazone (Avandia) and macular edema |journal=CMAJ |volume=174 |issue=5 |pages=623 |date=February 2006 |pmid=16467508 |pmc=1389823 |doi=10.1503/cmaj.060074}}</ref> documented several occurrences and recommended discontinuation at the first sign of vision problems.
Both rosiglitazone and pioglitazone have been suspected of causing [[macular edema]], which damages the retina of the eye and causes partial blindness. Blindness is also a possible effect of diabetes, which rosiglitazone is intended to treat. One report<ref name="pmid16467508">{{cite journal | author = Kendall C, Wooltorton E | title = Rosiglitazone (Avandia) and macular edema | journal = CMAJ | volume = 174 | issue = 5 | pages = 623 | year = 2006 | pmid = 16467508 | pmc = 1389823 | doi = 10.1503/cmaj.060074 }}</ref> documented several occurrences and recommended discontinuation at the first sign of vision problems.


===Hepatotoxicity===
===Hepatotoxicity===
Line 109: Line 110:
Rosiglitazone is a member of the thiazolidinedione class of drugs. Thiazolidinediones act as insulin sensitizers. They reduce glucose, fatty acid, and insulin blood concentrations. They work by binding to the [[peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor]]s (PPARs). PPARs are [[receptor (proteomics)|receptors]] on the membrane of the cell nucleus. Thiazolidinediones enter the cell, bind to the nuclear receptors, and affect the expression of DNA. The several PPARs include PPARα, PPARβ/δ, and PPARγ. Thiazolidinediones bind to [[Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma|PPARγ]].
Rosiglitazone is a member of the thiazolidinedione class of drugs. Thiazolidinediones act as insulin sensitizers. They reduce glucose, fatty acid, and insulin blood concentrations. They work by binding to the [[peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor]]s (PPARs). PPARs are [[receptor (proteomics)|receptors]] on the membrane of the cell nucleus. Thiazolidinediones enter the cell, bind to the nuclear receptors, and affect the expression of DNA. The several PPARs include PPARα, PPARβ/δ, and PPARγ. Thiazolidinediones bind to [[Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma|PPARγ]].
[[File:Avandia 2mg oral tablet.jpg|thumb|Avandia 2-mg oral tablet]]
[[File:Avandia 2mg oral tablet.jpg|thumb|Avandia 2-mg oral tablet]]
PPARs are expressed in fat cells, cells of the liver, muscle, heart, and inner wall (endothelium) and smooth muscle of blood vessels. PPARγ is expressed mainly in fat tissue, where it regulates genes involved in fat cell (adipocyte) differentiation, fatty acid uptake and storage, and glucose uptake. It is also found in pancreatic beta cells, vascular endothelium, and macrophages.<ref>[http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/351/11/1106 Thiazolidinediones], Hannele Yki-Järvinen, New Engl J Med 351:1106-1118 (September 9, 2004).</ref> Rosiglitazone is a selective ligand of PPARγ and has no PPARα-binding action. Other drugs bind to PPARα.
PPARs are expressed in fat cells, cells of the liver, muscle, heart, and inner wall (endothelium) and smooth muscle of blood vessels. PPARγ is expressed mainly in fat tissue, where it regulates genes involved in fat cell (adipocyte) differentiation, fatty acid uptake and storage, and glucose uptake. It is also found in pancreatic beta cells, vascular endothelium, and macrophages<ref name="pmid15356308">{{cite journal | author = Yki-Järvinen H | title = Thiazolidinediones | journal = N. Engl. J. Med. | volume = 351 | issue = 11 | pages = 1106–18 | year = 2004 | pmid = 15356308 | doi = 10.1056/NEJMra041001 | url = }}</ref> Rosiglitazone is a selective ligand of PPARγ and has no PPARα-binding action. Other drugs bind to PPARα.


Rosiglitazone also appears to have an anti-[[inflammation|inflammatory]] effect in addition to its effect on [[insulin resistance]]. Nuclear factor kappa-B ([[NF-κB]]), a signaling molecule, stimulates the inflammatory pathways. NF-κB inhibitor (IκB) downregulates the inflammatory pathways. When patients take rosiglitazone, NF-κB levels fall and IκB levels increase.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Mohanty P, Aljada A, Ghanim H, ''et al.'' |title=Evidence for a potent antiinflammatory effect of rosiglitazone |journal=J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. |volume=89 |issue=6 |pages=2728–35 |date=June 2004 |pmid=15181049 |doi=10.1210/jc.2003-032103}}</ref>
Rosiglitazone also appears to have an anti-[[inflammation|inflammatory]] effect in addition to its effect on [[insulin resistance]]. Nuclear factor kappa-B ([[NF-κB]]), a signaling molecule, stimulates the inflammatory pathways. NF-κB inhibitor (IκB) downregulates the inflammatory pathways. When patients take rosiglitazone, NF-κB levels fall and IκB levels increase.<ref name="pmid15181049">{{cite journal | author = Mohanty P, Aljada A, Ghanim H, Hofmeyer D, Tripathy D, Syed T, Al-Haddad W, Dhindsa S, Dandona P | title = Evidence for a potent antiinflammatory effect of rosiglitazone | journal = J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. | volume = 89 | issue = 6 | pages = 2728–35 | year = 2004 | pmid = 15181049 | doi = 10.1210/jc.2003-032103 }}</ref>


==Society and culture==
==Society and culture==
Line 131: Line 132:


====United States investigations====
====United States investigations====
The FDA began investigating the drug in 2007 after reports it likely caused an increased risk in heart attacks, but following a 2007 study, an FDA advisory panel agreed Avandia did not cause a statistically significant increase in heart attacks. The FDA voted to keep the drug on the market; a few months later, however, the agency added a boxed warning about potential heart risks of Avandia.<ref>http://www.aarp.org/health/drugs-supplements/info-06-2010/diabetes_drug_found_to_increase_risk_of_stroke_heart_failure_and_death.2.html</ref> A study was conducted evaluating the geographic variation in the use of rosiglitazone following the boxed warning issued in 2007. Residual use varied by state, which may be explained by uncertainty regarding how to translate FDA warnings into practice, by differences in coverage policies among health plans and in formularies among states, and by regional differences in the distribution and influence of pharmaceutical marketing, specialists, and opinion leaders.<ref name=shah>{{cite journal|last=Shah|first=Nilay|coauthors=Victor M Montori, Harlan M Krumholz, Karen Tu, G Caleb Alexander and Cynthia A Jackevicius|title=Responding to an FDA Warning — Geographic Variation in the Use of Rosiglitazone|journal=New England Journal of Medicine|date=25 November 2010|volume=363|pages=2081–2084|pmid=21083379|doi=10.1056/NEJMp1011042|issue=22}}</ref>
The FDA began investigating the drug in 2007 after reports it likely caused an increased risk in heart attacks, but following a 2007 study, an FDA advisory panel agreed Avandia did not cause a statistically significant increase in heart attacks. The FDA voted to keep the drug on the market; a few months later, however, the agency added a boxed warning about potential heart risks of Avandia.<ref>http://www.aarp.org/health/drugs-supplements/info-06-2010/diabetes_drug_found_to_increase_risk_of_stroke_heart_failure_and_death.2.html</ref> A study was conducted evaluating the geographic variation in the use of rosiglitazone following the boxed warning issued in 2007. Residual use varied by state, which may be explained by uncertainty regarding how to translate FDA warnings into practice, by differences in coverage policies among health plans and in formularies among states, and by regional differences in the distribution and influence of pharmaceutical marketing, specialists, and opinion leaders.<ref name=shah>{{cite journal | author = Shah ND, Montori VM, Krumholz HM, Tu K, Alexander GC, Jackevicius CA | title = Responding to an FDA warning--geographic variation in the use of rosiglitazone | journal = N. Engl. J. Med. | volume = 363 | issue = 22 | pages = 2081–4 | year = 2010 | pmid = 21083379 | doi = 10.1056/NEJMp1011042 }}</ref>


In 2007, a panel of independent researchers reported Avandia could, in fact, increase patients' risks of heart attack, but they recommended it remain on the market. An FDA oversight committee voted in 2007, eight to seven, to accept that advice and keep it on the market.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/01/business/la-fi-lazarus-20100702 | work=The Los Angeles Times | title=Avandia: When does a drug's harm outweigh its benefit? | first=David | last=Lazarus | date=2010-07-01}}</ref>
In 2007, a panel of independent researchers reported Avandia could, in fact, increase patients' risks of heart attack, but they recommended it remain on the market. An FDA oversight committee voted in 2007, eight to seven, to accept that advice and keep it on the market.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/01/business/la-fi-lazarus-20100702 | work=The Los Angeles Times | title=Avandia: When does a drug's harm outweigh its benefit? | first=David | last=Lazarus | date=2010-07-01}}</ref>
Line 144: Line 145:
On July 14, 2010, after two days of extensive deliberations, the FDA panel investigating Avandia came to a mixed vote. Twelve members of the panel voted to take the drug off the market, 17 recommended to leave it on but with a more revised warning label, and three voted to keep it on the market with the current warning label.<ref>http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/breaking-news-12-panel-members-recommend-avandia-withdrawal/2010-07-14</ref><ref>http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/what-does-avandia-vote-mean/2010-07-14?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal</ref> The panel has come to some controversy, however; on July 20, 2010, one of the panelists was discovered to have been a paid speaker for GlaxoSmithKline, arousing questions of a conflict of interest. This panel member was one of the three who voted to keep Avandia on the market with no additional warning labels.<ref>http://www.pharmalot.com/2010/07/an-undisclosed-conflict-on-the-fda-avandia-panel/</ref><ref>{{cite news| url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704720004575377552600421936.html | work=The Wall Street Journal | title=Panelist Who Backed Avandia Gets Fees From Glaxo | first=Alicia | last=Mundy | date=2010-07-20}}</ref><ref>{{cite news| url=http://triangle.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2010/07/19/daily18.html | first=James | last=Gallagher | title=Report: Avandia panelist paid by GSK | date=2010-07-20}}</ref>
On July 14, 2010, after two days of extensive deliberations, the FDA panel investigating Avandia came to a mixed vote. Twelve members of the panel voted to take the drug off the market, 17 recommended to leave it on but with a more revised warning label, and three voted to keep it on the market with the current warning label.<ref>http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/breaking-news-12-panel-members-recommend-avandia-withdrawal/2010-07-14</ref><ref>http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/what-does-avandia-vote-mean/2010-07-14?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal</ref> The panel has come to some controversy, however; on July 20, 2010, one of the panelists was discovered to have been a paid speaker for GlaxoSmithKline, arousing questions of a conflict of interest. This panel member was one of the three who voted to keep Avandia on the market with no additional warning labels.<ref>http://www.pharmalot.com/2010/07/an-undisclosed-conflict-on-the-fda-avandia-panel/</ref><ref>{{cite news| url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704720004575377552600421936.html | work=The Wall Street Journal | title=Panelist Who Backed Avandia Gets Fees From Glaxo | first=Alicia | last=Mundy | date=2010-07-20}}</ref><ref>{{cite news| url=http://triangle.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2010/07/19/daily18.html | first=James | last=Gallagher | title=Report: Avandia panelist paid by GSK | date=2010-07-20}}</ref>


In 2011 the FDA has decided on revising its prescribing information and medication guides for all rosilitazone containing medicines. The US label for rosiglitazone ([[Avandia]], [[GlaxoSmithKline]]) and all rosiglitazone-containing medications ([[Avandamet]] and [[Avandaryl]]) now include the additional safety information and restrictions.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Ross JS, Jackevicius C, Krumholz HM, ''et al.'' |title=State Medicaid programs did not make use of prior authorization to promote safer prescribing after rosiglitazone warning |journal=Health Aff (Millwood) |volume=31 |issue=1 |pages=188–98 |date=January 2012 |pmid=22232110 |pmc=3319744 |doi=10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1068}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=O'Riordan|first=Michael|title=New rosiglitazone label includes restrictions on use|url=http://www.theheart.org/article/1182011.do|publisher=http://www.theheart.org|accessdate=1 April 2011}}</ref> The revised labels restrict use to patients already taking a rosiglitazone-containing medicine or to new patients who are unable to achieve adequate glycemic control on other diabetes medications and to those, who in consultation with their healthcare provider, have decided not to take Actos ([[pioglitazone]]) or other pioglitazone-containing medicines for medical reasons.<ref>{{cite web|title=GSK revises US Avandia label to include new restrictions on use|url=http://www.gsk.com/media/pressreleases/2011/2011_pressrelease_10024.htm|publisher=http://www.gsk.com|accessdate=1 April 2011}}</ref>
In 2011 the FDA has decided on revising its prescribing information and medication guides for all rosilitazone containing medicines. The US label for rosiglitazone ([[Avandia]], [[GlaxoSmithKline]]) and all rosiglitazone-containing medications ([[Avandamet]] and [[Avandaryl]]) now include the additional safety information and restrictions.<ref name="pmid22232110">{{cite journal | author = Ross JS, Jackevicius C, Krumholz HM, Ridgeway J, Montori VM, Alexander GC, Zerzan J, Fan J, Shah ND | title = State Medicaid programs did not make use of prior authorization to promote safer prescribing after rosiglitazone warning | journal = Health Aff (Millwood) | volume = 31 | issue = 1 | pages = 188–98 | year = 2012 | pmid = 22232110 | pmc = 3319744 | doi = 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1068 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=O'Riordan|first=Michael|title=New rosiglitazone label includes restrictions on use|url=http://www.theheart.org/article/1182011.do|publisher=http://www.theheart.org|accessdate=1 April 2011}}</ref> The revised labels restrict use to patients already taking a rosiglitazone-containing medicine or to new patients who are unable to achieve adequate glycemic control on other diabetes medications and to those, who in consultation with their healthcare provider, have decided not to take Actos ([[pioglitazone]]) or other pioglitazone-containing medicines for medical reasons.<ref>{{cite web|title=GSK revises US Avandia label to include new restrictions on use|url=http://www.gsk.com/media/pressreleases/2011/2011_pressrelease_10024.htm|publisher=http://www.gsk.com|accessdate=1 April 2011}}</ref>


In June 2013 an FDA Advisory Committee reviewed all available data, including a re-adjudicated RECORD trial, found no evidence of increased cardiovascular risk with Avandia, and voted to remove the restrictions on Avandia marketing in the United States. In November 2013, the US FDA removed these marketing restrictions on the product.<ref>{{cite web|title=Rosiglitazone-containing Diabetes Medicines: Drug Safety Communication - Removal of Some Prescribing and Dispensing Restrictions|url=http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformation/SafetyAlertsforHumanMedicalProducts/ucm376683.htm?source=govdelivery&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery|publisher=FDA}}</ref>
In June 2013 an FDA Advisory Committee reviewed all available data, including a re-adjudicated RECORD trial, found no evidence of increased cardiovascular risk with Avandia, and voted to remove the restrictions on Avandia marketing in the United States. In November 2013, the US FDA removed these marketing restrictions on the product.<ref>{{cite web|title=Rosiglitazone-containing Diabetes Medicines: Drug Safety Communication - Removal of Some Prescribing and Dispensing Restrictions|url=http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformation/SafetyAlertsforHumanMedicalProducts/ucm376683.htm?source=govdelivery&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery|publisher=FDA}}</ref>
Line 168: Line 169:


==Research==
==Research==
Rosiglitazone was thought to be able to benefit patients with [[Alzheimer's disease]] who do not express the [[Apolipoprotein E|ApoE4]] [[allele]],<ref>{{cite journal |author=Risner ME, Saunders AM, Altman JF, ''et al.'' |title=Efficacy of rosiglitazone in a genetically defined population with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease |journal=Pharmacogenomics J. |volume=6 |issue=4 |pages=246–54 |year=2006 |pmid=16446752|doi=10.1038/sj.tpj.6500369}}</ref> but the phase III trial designed to test this showed that rosiglitazone was ineffective in all patients, including [[Apolipoprotein E|ApoE4]]-negative patients.<ref>{{cite journal|author=Gold M, Alderton C, Zvartau-Hind M, ''et al.'' |title=Rosiglitazone monotherapy in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease: results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study|journal=Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord |volume=30 |issue=2 |pages=131–46 |year=2010 |pmid=20733306 |pmc=3214882|doi=10.1159/000318845}}</ref>
Rosiglitazone was thought to be able to benefit patients with [[Alzheimer's disease]] who do not express the [[Apolipoprotein E|ApoE4]] [[allele]],<ref name="pmid16446752">{{cite journal | author = Risner ME, Saunders AM, Altman JF, Ormandy GC, Craft S, Foley IM, Zvartau-Hind ME, Hosford DA, Roses AD | title = Efficacy of rosiglitazone in a genetically defined population with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease | journal = Pharmacogenomics J. | volume = 6 | issue = 4 | pages = 246–54 | year = 2006 | pmid = 16446752 | doi = 10.1038/sj.tpj.6500369 }}</ref> but the phase III trial designed to test this showed that rosiglitazone was ineffective in all patients, including [[Apolipoprotein E|ApoE4]]-negative patients.<ref name="pmid20733306">{{cite journal | author = Gold M, Alderton C, Zvartau-Hind M, Egginton S, Saunders AM, Irizarry M, Craft S, Landreth G, Linnamägi U, Sawchak S | title = Rosiglitazone monotherapy in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease: results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study | journal = Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord | volume = 30 | issue = 2 | pages = 131–46 | year = 2010 | pmid = 20733306 | pmc = 3214882 | doi = 10.1159/000318845 }}</ref>


Rosiglitazone may also treat mild to moderate [[ulcerative colitis]], due to its anti-inflammatory properties as a PPAR ligand.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Lewis JD |title=Will 2008 mark the start of a new clinical trial era in gastroenterology? |journal=Gastroenterology |volume=134 |issue=5 |pages=1289 |date=May 2008|pmid=18471502 |doi=10.1053/j.gastro.2008.03.030}}</ref>
Rosiglitazone may also treat mild to moderate [[ulcerative colitis]], due to its anti-inflammatory properties as a PPAR ligand.<ref name="pmid18471502">{{cite journal | author = Lewis JD | title = Will 2008 mark the start of a new clinical trial era in gastroenterology? | journal = Gastroenterology | volume = 134 | issue = 5 | pages = 1289 | year = 2008 | pmid = 18471502 | doi = 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.03.030 }}</ref>


==References==
==References==

Revision as of 22:14, 28 March 2014

Rosiglitazone
Clinical data
Trade namesAvandia
AHFS/Drugs.comMonograph
MedlinePlusa699023
License data
Pregnancy
category
  • AU: B3
Routes of
administration		Oral
ATC code
Legal status
Legal status
Pharmacokinetic data
Bioavailability99%
Protein binding99.8%
MetabolismHepatic (CYP2C8-mediated)
Elimination half-life3-4 hours
ExcretionRenal (64%) and fecal (23%)
Identifiers
  • (RS)-5-[4-(2-[methyl(pyridin-2-yl)amino]ethoxy)benzyl]thiazolidine-2,4-dione
CAS Number
PubChem CID
IUPHAR/BPS
DrugBank
ChemSpider
UNII
KEGG
ChEBI
ChEMBL
PDB ligand
CompTox Dashboard (EPA)
ECHA InfoCard100.108.114 Edit this at Wikidata
Chemical and physical data
FormulaC18H19N3O3S
Molar mass357.428 g/mol g·mol−1
3D model (JSmol)
  • O=C1NC(=O)SC1Cc3ccc(OCCN(c2ncccc2)C)cc3
  • InChI=1S/C18H19N3O3S/c1-21(16-4-2-3-9-19-16)10-11-24-14-7-5-13(6-8-14)12-15-17(22)20-18(23)25-15/h2-9,15H,10-12H2,1H3,(H,20,22,23) checkY
  • Key:YASAKCUCGLMORW-UHFFFAOYSA-N checkY
 ☒NcheckY (what is this?)  (verify)

Rosiglitazone (trade name Avandia, GlaxoSmithKline) is an antidiabetic drug in the thiazolidinedione class of drugs. It works as an insulin sensitizer, by binding to the PPAR receptors in fat cells and making the cells more responsive to insulin. It is marketed by the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) as a stand-alone drug or for use in combination with metformin or with glimepiride. First released in 1999, annual sales peaked at approximately $2.5-billion in 2006; however, following a meta-analysis published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2007 that linked the drug's use to an increased risk of heart attack,[1] sales plummeted to just $9.5-million in 2012. The drug's patent expired in 2012.[2]

Despite rosiglitazone's effectiveness at decreasing blood sugar in type 2 diabetes mellitus, its use decreased dramatically as studies showed apparent associations with increased risks of heart attacks and death.[3] Adverse effects alleged to be caused by rosiglitazone were the subject of over 13,000 lawsuits against GSK;[4] as of July 2010, GSK had agreed to settlements on more than 11,500 of these suits.

Some reviewers recommended rosiglitazone be taken off the market, but an FDA panel disagreed, and it remains available in the U.S.[5] From November 2011 until November 2013, the federal government did not allow Avandia to be sold without a prescription from a certified doctor; moreover, patients were required to be informed of the risks associated with its use, and the drug had to be purchased by mail order through specified pharmacies.[6] In November 2013, the FDA lifted its earlier restrictions on rosiglitazone after reviewing the results of the RECORD clinical trial (a six-year, open label randomized control trial), which failed to show the heart infact risks associated with the drug.[7][8]

In Europe, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) recommended in September 2010 that the drug be suspended from the European market. [9][10] In New Zealand, rosiglitazone was withdrawn from the market in April 2011.[11] It was banned in India in 2010.[12]

Medical uses

While once commonly used in type 2 diabetes rosiglitazone has not been found to improve outcomes and likely worsens them. So there is no evidence that patient-oriented outcomes like mortality, morbidity, adverse effects, costs and health-related quality of life are positively influenced by this compound. Glycemic control measured by glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) as a surrogate endpoint did not demonstrate clinically relevant differences to other oral antidiabetic drugs.[13][14]

Adverse effects

Heart infarction and heart failure

A meta-analysis in May 2007 reported the use of rosiglitazone was associated with an increased risk of heart attack (odds ratio = 1.43, 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 1.98; P=0.03), and a higher (but non-significant) increase in risk of death from all cardiovascular diseases (odds ratio = 1.64, 95% confidence interval, 0.98 to 2.74; P=0.06).[1]

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an alert on May 21, 2007.[15] On July 30, 2007, an Advisory Committee of the Food and Drug Administration concluded the use of rosiglitazone for the treatment of type 2 diabetes was associated with a greater risk of myocardial ischemic events (including heart attacks) than a placebo, but data from several long term, prospective clinical trials showed when rosiglitazone was compared to metformin, or sulfonylurea, there was no difference in the risk of heart attack. These data, coupled with the meta-analysis, prompted the FDA to state the data on the association between rosiglitazone and myocardial ischemia were inconclusive. The meta-analysis was not supported by an interim analysis of the trial designed to evaluate this, and several other reports have failed to resolve the controversy.

At the same time, a report by the Senate Finance Committee accused GlaxoSmithKline of knowing about the drug's risks well before they became public. The report also criticized the FDA for letting clinical trials continue, despite 83,000 heart attacks from 1999 to 2007 that the FDA linked to rosiglitazone. This Senate Committee report from November 2007 is entitled "The Intimidation of Dr. John Buse and the Diabetes Drug Avandia". The title refers to (temporarily successful) efforts made by GSK beginning in 1999 to intimidate an academic scientist from continuing to suggest Avandia had cardiovascular risk. The drug now bears a boxed warning about exactly this risk. GlaxoSmithKline maintains the drug is safe and the Senate report did not consider scientific evidence or the company's efforts to make known its concerns to the parties involved. However, the FDA still recommends patients continue taking it unless their doctors tell them otherwise.[16][17]

In February 2010, David Graham, the FDA's associate director of drug safety, recommended rosiglitazone be taken off the market. In June 2010, Graham et al., published a retrospective study of 227,571 elderly American patients, comparing roziglitazone to pioglitazone, the other thiazolidinedione marketed in the United States. The authors concluded rosiglitazone was associated with "an increased risk of stroke, heart failure, and all-cause mortality and an increased risk of the composite of AMI, stroke, heart failure, or all-cause mortality in patients 65 years or older".[18] The number needed to harm with roziglitazone was sixty. Graham argued rosiglitazone caused 500 more heart attacks and 300 more heart failures than its main competitor.

The controversy over adverse effects has dramatically reduced the use of rosiglitazone.[19] No studies have shown that rosiglitazone reduces the risk of stroke, amputation, heart attack, blindness, neuropathy or renal failure.

An updated meta analysis of 56 trials released in 2010, including the open label Record trial from 2009, found again an increased risk for heart infarction against control, but not for cardiovascular death.[20] Another meta analysis from 2010 found only a higher risk of heart failure, mostly when rosiglitazone was administered as add-on therapy to insulin. It included more trials, but also trials with short duration.[21]

A meta-analysis of observational studies released in March, 2011, provides more evidence that rosiglitazone is associated with a higher risk of heart failure, myocardial infarction and death than a similar agent, pioglitazone in real life. The meta-analysis had 16 observational studies involving 810 000 patients taking rosiglitazone or pioglitazone.[22][23] This was confirmed by another meta-analysis on 8 retrospective cohort studies, most in the US.[3]

Stroke

Avandia has been linked to stroke. In a study led by FDA scientist David J. Graham, MD, MPH, by comparing the patient records of elderly patients using Avandia and alternative drug Actos, found Avandia increased the risk of stroke by over 27% relatively (for example, someone with a 1% risk of stroke taking Actos would have a 1.27% risk taking Avandia, on average).[24][25][26]

Bone fractures

GlaxoSmithKline reported a greater incidence of fractures of the upper arms, hands and feet in female diabetics given rosiglitazone compared with those given metformin or glyburide.[27] The information was based on data from the ADOPT trial[28] The same increase has been found with pioglitazone (Actos), another TZD.

Eye damage

Both rosiglitazone and pioglitazone have been suspected of causing macular edema, which damages the retina of the eye and causes partial blindness. Blindness is also a possible effect of diabetes, which rosiglitazone is intended to treat. One report[29] documented several occurrences and recommended discontinuation at the first sign of vision problems.

Hepatotoxicity

Moderate to severe acute hepatitis has occurred in several adults who had been taking the drug at the recommended dose for two to four weeks. Plasma rosiglitazone concentrations may be significantly increased in patients with pre-existing hepatic impairment.[30]

Contraindications

Both rosiglitazone and pioglitazone are contraindicated in patients with NYHA Class III and IV heart failure.

Pharmacology

Rosiglitazone is a member of the thiazolidinedione class of drugs. Thiazolidinediones act as insulin sensitizers. They reduce glucose, fatty acid, and insulin blood concentrations. They work by binding to the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs). PPARs are receptors on the membrane of the cell nucleus. Thiazolidinediones enter the cell, bind to the nuclear receptors, and affect the expression of DNA. The several PPARs include PPARα, PPARβ/δ, and PPARγ. Thiazolidinediones bind to PPARγ.

Avandia 2-mg oral tablet

PPARs are expressed in fat cells, cells of the liver, muscle, heart, and inner wall (endothelium) and smooth muscle of blood vessels. PPARγ is expressed mainly in fat tissue, where it regulates genes involved in fat cell (adipocyte) differentiation, fatty acid uptake and storage, and glucose uptake. It is also found in pancreatic beta cells, vascular endothelium, and macrophages[31] Rosiglitazone is a selective ligand of PPARγ and has no PPARα-binding action. Other drugs bind to PPARα.

Rosiglitazone also appears to have an anti-inflammatory effect in addition to its effect on insulin resistance. Nuclear factor kappa-B (NF-κB), a signaling molecule, stimulates the inflammatory pathways. NF-κB inhibitor (IκB) downregulates the inflammatory pathways. When patients take rosiglitazone, NF-κB levels fall and IκB levels increase.[32]

Society and culture

Sales

US sales of the drug were of $2.2 billion in 2006.[33] Sales in 2Q 2007 down 22% compared to 2006.[34] 4Q 2007 sales down to $252 million.[35]

Though sales have gone down since 2007 due to safety concerns, Avandia sales for 2009 totalled $1.2 billion worldwide.[17]

Lawsuits

The Guardian reported lawsuits over the drug could total from $1 billion to $6 billion, based on research by analysts for UBS, who say 13,000 suits have been filed.[36] Included among those suing: Santa Clara County, California, which claims to have spent $2 million on rosiglitazone between 1999 and 2007 at its public hospital and is asking for "triple damages".[37] In May 2010, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) reached settlement agreements for some of the cases against the company, agreeing to pay $60 million to resolve 700 suits.[38] In July 2010, GSK reached settlement agreements to close another 10,000 of the lawsuits against it, agreeing to pay about $460 million to settle these suits.[39][40] In a statement, Michael Miller, the attorney representing 1,500 patients in the suit, said about the settlement, "It's a compromise that allows both sides to put this behind them and move on."[41]

In 2012, the U.S. Justice Department announced GlaxoSmithKline had agreed to plead guilty and pay a $3 billion fine, in part for withholding the results of two studies of the cardiovascular safety of Avandia between 2001 and 2007.[42]

Government investigations

The drug has been under investigation in the US and in Europe. In September 2010, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decided rosiglitazone can remain available, but with certain restrictions. Also, the European Medicines Agency has decided to stop making all rosiglitazone-containing antidiabetes medication available in Europe.[43]

United States investigations

The FDA began investigating the drug in 2007 after reports it likely caused an increased risk in heart attacks, but following a 2007 study, an FDA advisory panel agreed Avandia did not cause a statistically significant increase in heart attacks. The FDA voted to keep the drug on the market; a few months later, however, the agency added a boxed warning about potential heart risks of Avandia.[44] A study was conducted evaluating the geographic variation in the use of rosiglitazone following the boxed warning issued in 2007. Residual use varied by state, which may be explained by uncertainty regarding how to translate FDA warnings into practice, by differences in coverage policies among health plans and in formularies among states, and by regional differences in the distribution and influence of pharmaceutical marketing, specialists, and opinion leaders.[45]

In 2007, a panel of independent researchers reported Avandia could, in fact, increase patients' risks of heart attack, but they recommended it remain on the market. An FDA oversight committee voted in 2007, eight to seven, to accept that advice and keep it on the market.[46]

GlaxoSmithKline is currently being investigated by the FDA and the US Congress regarding Avandia.

Senators Democrat Max Baucus and Republican Charles Grassley filed a report urging GSK to withdraw Avandia in 2008 due to the side effects. The report noted the drug caused 500 avoidable heart attacks a month, and Glaxo officials sought to intimidate doctors who criticized the drug. It also said GSK continued to sell and promote the drug despite knowing the increased risk of heart attacks and stroke.[47]

The Senate Finance Committee, in a panel investigation, revealed emails from GSK company officials that suggest the company downplayed scientific findings about safety risks dating back to 2000. It was also alleged by the committee that the company initiated a "ghostwriting campaign", whereby GSK sought outside companies to write positive articles about Avandia to submit to medical journals.[48] GSK defended itself by presenting data that its own tests found Avandia to be safe, although an FDA staff report showed the conclusions were flawed.[49] Many studies have found the drug to have serious safety concerns.[50][medical citation needed]

On July 14, 2010, after two days of extensive deliberations, the FDA panel investigating Avandia came to a mixed vote. Twelve members of the panel voted to take the drug off the market, 17 recommended to leave it on but with a more revised warning label, and three voted to keep it on the market with the current warning label.[51][52] The panel has come to some controversy, however; on July 20, 2010, one of the panelists was discovered to have been a paid speaker for GlaxoSmithKline, arousing questions of a conflict of interest. This panel member was one of the three who voted to keep Avandia on the market with no additional warning labels.[53][54][55]

In 2011 the FDA has decided on revising its prescribing information and medication guides for all rosilitazone containing medicines. The US label for rosiglitazone (Avandia, GlaxoSmithKline) and all rosiglitazone-containing medications (Avandamet and Avandaryl) now include the additional safety information and restrictions.[56][57] The revised labels restrict use to patients already taking a rosiglitazone-containing medicine or to new patients who are unable to achieve adequate glycemic control on other diabetes medications and to those, who in consultation with their healthcare provider, have decided not to take Actos (pioglitazone) or other pioglitazone-containing medicines for medical reasons.[58]

In June 2013 an FDA Advisory Committee reviewed all available data, including a re-adjudicated RECORD trial, found no evidence of increased cardiovascular risk with Avandia, and voted to remove the restrictions on Avandia marketing in the United States. In November 2013, the US FDA removed these marketing restrictions on the product.[59]

European investigations

According to a probe by the British Medical Journal in September 2010, the United Kingdom's Commission on Human Medicines recommended to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) back in July 2010, to withdraw Avandia sale because its "risks outweigh its benefits". Additionally, the probe revealed that in 2000, members of the European panel in charge of reviewing Avandia prior to its approval had concerns about the long-term risks of the drug.[60][61] The European Medicines Agency recommended on 23 September 2010 that Avandia be suspended from the European market.[9][10]

New Zealand

Rosiglitazone was withdrawn from the New Zealand market April 2011 because Medsafe concluded the suspected cardiovascular risks of the medicine for patients with type 2 diabetes outweigh its benefits.[62]

South Africa

A notice issued by the Medicines Control Council of South Africa on July 5, 2011 stated that it had resolved on July 3, 2011 to withdraw all rosiglitazone-containing medicines from the South African market due to safety risks. It disallowed all new prescriptions of Avandia.[63]

Controversy and response

Following the reports in 2007 that Avandia can significantly increase the risk of heart attacks, the drug has been controversial. A 2010 article in Time uses the Avandia case as evidence of a broken FDA regulatory system that "may prove criminal as well as fatal". It details the disclosure failures, adding, "Congressional reports revealed that GSK sat on early evidence of the heart risks of its drug, and that the FDA knew of the dangers months before it informed the public." It reports, "the FDA is investigating whether GSK broke the law by failing to fully inform the agency of Avandia's heart risks", according to deputy FDA commissioner Dr. Joshua Sharfstein. GSK threatened academics who reported adverse research results, and received multiple warning letters from the FDA for deceptive marketing and failure to report clinical data.[64]

The maker of the drug, GlaxoSmithKline, has dealt with serious backlash against the company for the drug's controversy.[65] Sales on the drug dropped significantly after the story first broke in 2007, dropping from $2.5 billion in 2006 to less than $408 million in 2009 in the US.[66]

In response to the rise in risk of heart attacks, the Indian government ordered GSK to suspend its research study, called TIDE, in 2010.[67][68] Takeda Pharmaceuticals responded to the controversy by running a large advertising campaign for its rival diabetes drug Actos, first in 2007 and again in 2010.[69] The FDA also halted the TIDE study in the United States.[70][70]

Three doctors' groups, the Endocrine Society, the American Diabetes Association and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, urged patients to continue to take the drug as it would be much worse to stop all treatment, despite any associated risk, but that patients could consult their doctors and begin a switch to a different drug if they or their doctors find concern.[71][72][73] The American Heart Association said in a statement in June 2010: " ...the reports deserves serious consideration, and patients with diabetes who are 65 years of age or older and being treated with rosiglitazone should discuss the findings with their prescribing physician....". "For patients with diabetes, the most serious consequences are heart disease and stroke, and the risk of suffering from them is significantly increased when diabetes is present. As in most situations, patients should not change or stop medications without consulting their healthcare provider."[74][75]

Research

Rosiglitazone was thought to be able to benefit patients with Alzheimer's disease who do not express the ApoE4 allele,[76] but the phase III trial designed to test this showed that rosiglitazone was ineffective in all patients, including ApoE4-negative patients.[77]

Rosiglitazone may also treat mild to moderate ulcerative colitis, due to its anti-inflammatory properties as a PPAR ligand.[78]

References

  1. ^ a b Nissen SE, Wolski K (2007). "Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes". N. Engl. J. Med. 356 (24): 2457–71. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa072761. PMID 17517853. Cite error: The named reference "pmid17517853" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  2. ^ US 5002953 
  3. ^ a b Chen X, Yang L, Zhai SD (2012). "Risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality among diabetic patients prescribed rosiglitazone or pioglitazone: a meta-analysis of retrospective cohort studies". Chin. Med. J. 125 (23): 4301–6. PMID 23217404.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  4. ^ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-09/glaxo-withheld-avandia-study-former-fda-manager-said-to-testify-in-suit.html
  5. ^ Gardiner Harris (February 19, 2010). "Controversial Diabetes Drug Harms Heart, U.S. Concludes". New York Times. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  6. ^ "Most Popular E-mail Newsletter". USA Today. 2011-05-24.
  7. ^ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-25/glaxo-s-avandia-cleared-from-sales-restrictions-by-fda.html
  8. ^ U.S. Food and Drug Administration (November 25, 2013). "FDA requires removal of certain restrictions on the diabetes drug Avandia".
  9. ^ a b European Medicines Agency recommends suspension of Avandia, Avandamet and Avaglim
  10. ^ a b Call to 'suspend' diabetes drug
  11. ^ "Diabetes drug withdrawn". Stuff.co.nz. NZPA. 17 February 2011. Retrieved 5 November 2011.
  12. ^ "Drugs banned in India". Central Drugs Standard Control Organization, Dte.GHS, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. Retrieved 2013-09-17.
  13. ^ Richter B, Bandeira-Echtler E, Bergerhoff K, Clar C, Ebrahim SH (2007). "Rosiglitazone for type 2 diabetes mellitus". Cochrane Database Syst Rev (3): CD006063. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006063.pub2. PMID 17636824.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  14. ^ Selvin E, Bolen S, Yeh HC, Wiley C, Wilson LM, Marinopoulos SS, Feldman L, Vassy J, Wilson R, Bass EB, Brancati FL (2008). "Cardiovascular outcomes in trials of oral diabetes medications: a systematic review". Arch. Intern. Med. 168 (19): 2070–80. doi:10.1001/archinte.168.19.2070. PMC 2765722. PMID 18955635.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  15. ^ U.S. Food and Drug Administration (May 21, 2007). "FDA Issues Safety Alert on Avandia".
  16. ^ "Diabetes Drug Avandia Targeted By Reviewers on Safety". ABC News. 2010-02-23.
  17. ^ a b Ranii, David (2010-02-23). "Avandia fallout could hit Triangle". News & Observer. Retrieved 2010-03-05.
  18. ^ Graham DJ, Ouellet-Hellstrom R, MaCurdy TE, Ali F, Sholley C, Worrall C, Kelman JA (2010). "Risk of acute myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and death in elderly Medicare patients treated with rosiglitazone or pioglitazone". JAMA. 304 (4): 411–8. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.920. PMID 20584880.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  19. ^ Ajjan RA, Grant PJ (2008). "The cardiovascular safety of rosiglitazone". Expert Opin Drug Saf. 7 (4): 367–76. doi:10.1517/14740338.7.4.367. PMID 18613801.
  20. ^ Nissen SE, Wolski K (2010). "Rosiglitazone revisited: an updated meta-analysis of risk for myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality". Arch. Intern. Med. 170 (14): 1191–1201. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2010.207. PMID 20656674.
  21. ^ Mannucci E, Monami M, Di Bari M, Lamanna C, Gori F, Gensini GF, Marchionni N (2010). "Cardiac safety profile of rosiglitazone: a comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials". Int. J. Cardiol. 143 (2): 135–40. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2009.01.064. PMID 19328563.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  22. ^ Loke YK, Kwok CS, Singh S (2011). "Comparative cardiovascular effects of thiazolidinediones: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies". BMJ. 342: d1309. doi:10.1136/bmj.d1309. PMC 3230110. PMID 21415101.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  23. ^ Hughes S (27 March 2011). "More damning data on rosiglitazone". theheart.org. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |access date= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help)
  24. ^ Freeman, David W (2010-06-29). "Diabetes Drug and Risk: Avandia Linked to Stroke, Heart Trouble, Deaths". CBS News.
  25. ^ Elizabeth Agnvall (2010-06-28). "Drug Safety: Diabetes Drug Found to Increase Risk of Stroke, Heart Attack and Death. Researchers question why Avandia has not been removed from the market". AARP Bulletin. Retrieved 2011-11-03.
  26. ^ Daniel J. DeNoon (2010-06-28). "New Study: Avandia Riskier Than Actos: More Deaths, Heart Failure, Strokes in Elderly Patients Taking Diabetes Drug Avandia vs. Actos". WebMD Health News. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |review= ignored (help)
  27. ^ Cobitz, Alexander R (February 2007). Template:PDFlink. GlaxoSmithKline. Retrieved on 10 April 2007.
  28. ^ Kahn SE, Haffner SM, Heise MA, Herman WH, Holman RR, Jones NP, Kravitz BG, Lachin JM, O'Neill MC, Zinman B, Viberti G (2006). "Glycemic durability of rosiglitazone, metformin, or glyburide monotherapy". N. Engl. J. Med. 355 (23): 2427–43. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa066224. PMID 17145742.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  29. ^ Kendall C, Wooltorton E (2006). "Rosiglitazone (Avandia) and macular edema". CMAJ. 174 (5): 623. doi:10.1503/cmaj.060074. PMC 1389823. PMID 16467508.
  30. ^ R. Baselt, Disposition of Toxic Drugs and Chemicals in Man, 8th edition, Biomedical Publications, Foster City, CA, 2008, pp. 1399-1400.
  31. ^ Yki-Järvinen H (2004). "Thiazolidinediones". N. Engl. J. Med. 351 (11): 1106–18. doi:10.1056/NEJMra041001. PMID 15356308.
  32. ^ Mohanty P, Aljada A, Ghanim H, Hofmeyer D, Tripathy D, Syed T, Al-Haddad W, Dhindsa S, Dandona P (2004). "Evidence for a potent antiinflammatory effect of rosiglitazone". J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 89 (6): 2728–35. doi:10.1210/jc.2003-032103. PMID 15181049.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  33. ^ http://www.mmm-online.com/FDA-toughens-Avandia-warnings/article/96354/
  34. ^ Rubin, Rita (2007-07-26). "FDA panels to weigh Avandia heart risks". USA Today. Retrieved 2010-05-22.
  35. ^ "Glaxo Fourth-Quarter Profit Fell 10% on Avandia Sales (Update6)". Bloomberg. 2008-02-07.
  36. ^ Ranii, David (2010-03-05). "Avandia could cost GSK billions". News & Observer. Retrieved 2010-03-05.
  37. ^ "California county sues Glaxo over diabetes drug". Boston Globe. 2010-03-01. Retrieved 2013-02-25.
  38. ^ Feeley, Jef; Kelley, Trista (2010-05-11). "Glaxo Said to Pay About $60 Million in First Avandia Heart-Risk Settlement". Bloomberg.
  39. ^ Feeley, Jef; Kelley, Trista (2010-07-13). "Glaxo Said to Pay $460 Million to Settle Avandia Damage Suits". Bloomberg.
  40. ^ Dawber, Alistair (2010-07-14). "GSK 'settles Avandia claims' on first day of safety hearing". The Independent. London.
  41. ^ http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/gsk-settles-bulk-avandia-suits-460m/2010-07-14?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal
  42. ^ "Glaxo Agrees to Pay $3 Billion in Fraud Settlement". The New York Times. July 2, 2012.
  43. ^ Wood, Shelley. "FDA restricts rosiglitazone; EMA pulls the plug". http://www.theheart.org. Retrieved 1 April 2011. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  44. ^ http://www.aarp.org/health/drugs-supplements/info-06-2010/diabetes_drug_found_to_increase_risk_of_stroke_heart_failure_and_death.2.html
  45. ^ Shah ND, Montori VM, Krumholz HM, Tu K, Alexander GC, Jackevicius CA (2010). "Responding to an FDA warning--geographic variation in the use of rosiglitazone". N. Engl. J. Med. 363 (22): 2081–4. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1011042. PMID 21083379.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  46. ^ Lazarus, David (2010-07-01). "Avandia: When does a drug's harm outweigh its benefit?". The Los Angeles Times.
  47. ^ http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/health/timeline-history-of-avandia/2314/
  48. ^ http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/heavy-doses/2010/07/14/medical-experts-vote-on-whether-to-pull-avandia-from-market#ixzz0tgGHXXRG
  49. ^ http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/heavy-doses/2010/07/09/avandia-safety-questioned-again-before-a-government-panel-review
  50. ^ http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/heavy-doses/2010/06/28/avandia-heart-risks-found-in-two-studies
  51. ^ http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/breaking-news-12-panel-members-recommend-avandia-withdrawal/2010-07-14
  52. ^ http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/what-does-avandia-vote-mean/2010-07-14?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal
  53. ^ http://www.pharmalot.com/2010/07/an-undisclosed-conflict-on-the-fda-avandia-panel/
  54. ^ Mundy, Alicia (2010-07-20). "Panelist Who Backed Avandia Gets Fees From Glaxo". The Wall Street Journal.
  55. ^ Gallagher, James (2010-07-20). "Report: Avandia panelist paid by GSK".
  56. ^ Ross JS, Jackevicius C, Krumholz HM, Ridgeway J, Montori VM, Alexander GC, Zerzan J, Fan J, Shah ND (2012). "State Medicaid programs did not make use of prior authorization to promote safer prescribing after rosiglitazone warning". Health Aff (Millwood). 31 (1): 188–98. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1068. PMC 3319744. PMID 22232110.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  57. ^ O'Riordan, Michael. "New rosiglitazone label includes restrictions on use". http://www.theheart.org. Retrieved 1 April 2011. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  58. ^ "GSK revises US Avandia label to include new restrictions on use". http://www.gsk.com. Retrieved 1 April 2011. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  59. ^ "Rosiglitazone-containing Diabetes Medicines: Drug Safety Communication - Removal of Some Prescribing and Dispensing Restrictions". FDA.
  60. ^ Douglas, Jason (2010-09-06). "U.K. Medical Journal Questions Avandia License". The Wall Street Journal.
  61. ^ http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/u-k-watchdogs-vote-avandia-withdrawal/2010-09-07?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal
  62. ^ "Diabetes drug to be withdrawn over heart risk fears". New Zealand Herald. Feb 17, 2011.
  63. ^ Medicines Control Council. "Withdrawal of rosiglitazone-containing medicines from SA market". Department of Health, Republic of South Africa. Retrieved 25 November 2012.
  64. ^ After Avandia: Does the FDA Have a Drug Problem? Time, Thursday, Aug. 12, 2010, http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2010028,00.html
  65. ^ http://health.usnews.com/health-news/managing-your-healthcare/diabetes/articles/2010/07/09/will-avandia-be-yanked-off-the-market.html
  66. ^ http://www.mmm-online.com/exclusive-takeda-launches-actos-dtc-campaign-today/article/174652/
  67. ^ http://wwj.cbslocal.com/2010/07/14/avandia-drug-trials-shut-down-in-india/
  68. ^ http://www.pharmalot.com/2010/07/india-suspends-avandia-clinical-trials-over-risks/
  69. ^ http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/india-suspends-tide-takeda-touts-actos/2010-07-16?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal
  70. ^ a b http://www.foodconsumer.org/newsite/Non-food/Drug/fda_orders_glaxo_to_stop_an_avandia_trial_2307100700.html
  71. ^ "Don't dump Avandia, diabetes groups urge patients". Reuters. 2010-07-15.
  72. ^ Maugh II, Thomas H. (2010-07-15). "Patients taking Avandia should keep on doing so, doctor groups say". The Los Angeles Times.
  73. ^ Katz, Neil (2010-07-16). "Avandia News: What You Need to Know". CBS News.
  74. ^ "Booster Shots". The Los Angeles Times. 2010-06-29.
  75. ^ http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1892007/american_heart_association_comment_advisory_committee_recommends_that_us_food/index.html?source=r_health
  76. ^ Risner ME, Saunders AM, Altman JF, Ormandy GC, Craft S, Foley IM, Zvartau-Hind ME, Hosford DA, Roses AD (2006). "Efficacy of rosiglitazone in a genetically defined population with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease". Pharmacogenomics J. 6 (4): 246–54. doi:10.1038/sj.tpj.6500369. PMID 16446752.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  77. ^ Gold M, Alderton C, Zvartau-Hind M, Egginton S, Saunders AM, Irizarry M, Craft S, Landreth G, Linnamägi U, Sawchak S (2010). "Rosiglitazone monotherapy in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease: results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study". Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 30 (2): 131–46. doi:10.1159/000318845. PMC 3214882. PMID 20733306.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  78. ^ Lewis JD (2008). "Will 2008 mark the start of a new clinical trial era in gastroenterology?". Gastroenterology. 134 (5): 1289. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2008.03.030. PMID 18471502.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rosiglitazone&oldid=601720788"