Contact us for a free legal consultation about your Avandia lawsuit
Since the news broke about Avandia’s link to serious health complications, many patients have considered filing Avandia lawsuits.
If you’re thinking about an Avandia lawsuit, contact the unsafe drug litigation attorneys at Anapol Schartz for a free evaluation of your case.
More About Avandia :
» Avandia Resources on the Web
A black box warning is the strongest safety warning issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Named for their black borders, the warnings are supposed to call attention to life-threatening or very serious potential side effects of a drug.
They are the most serious action the FDA can take without recalling a drug or subjecting it to strict regulations. It was this type of warning that the FDA issued for Type II diabetes drug Avandia, after a study was published showing that Avandia raises its users’ risk of heart attacks by 43 percent and their risk of death from heart problems by 64 percent.
The black box warning on Avandia’s label was issued in May 2007 and revised twice in the following six months. The original warning said Avandia may raise the risk of congestive heart failure; its August revision added a warning that Avandia may worsen heart failure; and the November revision finally included a warning that Avandia may raise patients’ risk of heart attacks. These revisions have done nothing to silence critics who point out that the warning is written in “medicalese” that not all patients can understand; for example, the label refers to heart attacks as myocardial infarctions. And of course, many others wonder why the FDA has not chosen to take Avandia off the market altogether, or taken stronger steps to restrict its use.
That question is particularly troubling because emerging evidence shows that the FDA knew about Avandia’s cardiac risks before the May 2007 study came out. The agency’s own public statements acknowledged that it had “recently” received evidence showing the same safety problems that the New England Journal of Medicine Report uncovered. In Congressional hearings shortly after, it was revealed that some FDA regulators had called for a black box warning months before the study; one expert had sent a letter with concerns as early as 2000. The same hearings revealed that agency officials estimated that Avandia may have caused 60,000 to 100,000 avoidable heart attacks between 1999 and 2006.
Furthermore, regulators elsewhere in the world have reacted more strongly to the news that Avandia causes life-threatening cardiac events. Health Canada has banned the drug’s use with multi-drug cocktails or insulin, and restricted it to last-resort use for diabetics for whom other drugs have failed. European Union regulators never approved Avandia for heart patients in the first place, and strengthened Avandia’s warning labels there in October 2007. Despite all of this, the FDA refuses to take Avandia off the market, saying it needs more conclusive evidence that the medication causes heart problems. In July 2007, two months after the New England Journal of Medicine report, only one out of 23 FDA panelists voted for an Avandia recall.
In the wake of these concerns, Congressional regulators have started asking why the FDA didn’t take action sooner, or take more drastic action to protect the public from this potentially dangerous drug. The House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform has held hearings investigating why the FDA has not conducted its own post-market study. These hearings spawned another Congressional investigation when they revealed intimidation tactics by Avandia’s manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline. Dr. John Buse, a diabetes expert, testified that he spoke out on Avandia’s potential to increase its users’ risk of heart problems in 1999, only to be threatened with a lawsuit by the manufacturer over potential financial losses to the company. This surprising news spurred another Congressional investigation, by the Senate Finance Committee, which found that GlaxoSmithKline harassed and intimidated the doctor. The investigation also found that the manufacturer, like other drug companies, maintained an overly cozy relationship with the FDA that allowed it to stifle concerns Avandia’s relationship to heart problems -- until the independent study was published.
Between the time of Avandia’s FDA approval in 1999 and the first black box warnings, GlaxoSmithKline said, doctors wrote 80,000 new prescriptions for the drug each week. Its U.S. sales alone once topped $2.2 billion a year. Since the black box warnings began, new prescriptions for the drug have fallen by as much as 60 percent, and the company’s stock has suffered. This is exactly what GlaxoSmithKline sought to avoid when it ignored important information about Avandia’s safety. The eight-year delay between FDA approval and the revelations about Avandia means that millions of diabetics have been exposed to serious health risks; thousands may have died or suffered serious heart problems while GlaxoSmithKline stock stayed high.
Verdicts & Settlements |
Anapol TV |
Our Attorneys |
About Us |
Contact Us |
Site Map |
Avandia Lawsuits Site Map
Philadelphia, PA - Cherry Hill, NJ - Media, PA - Reading, PA - Harrisburg, PA
Copyright © - Anapol Schwartz - Pennsylvania Avandia Attorneys - Philadelphia Avandia Law Firm. All rights reserved.
Philadelphia Avandia Attorney Disclaimer: This website is dedicated to providing public information regarding Avandia and other legal information. None of the information on this site is intended to be formal legal advice, nor the formation of a lawyer or attorney client relationship. Please contact a Philadelphia Avandia Attorneys or Pennsylvania Avandia Lawyers at our law firm for information regarding your particular case. This website is not intended to solicit clients outside the States of New Jersey and Pennsylvania.