"Dear Doctor" Letters

February 2008 "Dear Doctor" Letter About Avelox / Avalox Is Sent By Bayer In Europe

Action Reportedly Intended To Emphasize 2007 Label Change About Severe, Possibly Fatal Liver And Skin Side Effects

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

A February 14, 2008 Reuters article, "Bayer warns doctors on rare Avelox side effects", reports that this German drug company is sending warning letters to doctors in Europe about the antibiotic Avelox, one of its top-selling drugs. This February 2008 letter -- which would be generally referred to as a "Dear Doctor" letter -- is reportedly intended to emphasize severe liver reactions and serious skin rashes that can be caused by Avelox use.

From the February 14 Reuters article about this Avelox letter from Bayer:

Bayer has included the additional warnings in the packaging of Avelox products since autumn last year after some incidents of severe side effects were monitored, but is now reinforcing this by writing to doctors.

"The side effects are very rare. But when it happens, it is quite severe to patients. We want doctors to be more aware," said Yvonne Moeller, a spokeswoman at Bayer.

Avelox, or Avalox in Europe, is used by patients as treatment for respiratory and other infections.

Some additional details about this development were provided by a Thomson Financial News article, "Avelox: Bayer warns of liver damage risk linked to Avelox antibiotic, changes label", also from February 14:

Bayer AG (NYSE:BAY) has warned doctors that its Avelox antibiotic may lead to potentially fatal liver damage and skin disease in rare cases, following a routine analysis of recent data on side effects.

The link between Avelox and the side effects has been known but the analysis has yielded very rare new cases, prompting the German drug maker to adjust the labelling of Avelox and informing doctors, a Bayer spokeswoman said, confirming a report in Dutch newspaper Algemeen Dagblad.

We will watch for any similar Avelox "Dear Doctor" letter from Bayer here in the U.S.

Cholesterol Drug Zetia May Cause Serious Liver Injury Including Hepatitis And Liver Failure

Health Canada First Raised This Zetia Safety Issue In February 2005; News Reporter Discovers In December 2007 That Information Known By Merck and Schering-Plough About These Zetia Side Effects May Have Been Withheld

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

Back on February 1, 2005 Health Canada posted on its web site a so-called "Dear Doctor" letter about Zetia (ezetimibe) -- called Ezetrol in Canada -- from Merck Frosst / Schering Pharmaceuticals that was intended to draw attention to some serious side effects associated with Zetia.  That 2005 Dear Doctor letter included the following:

The Warnings, Precautions, and Adverse Events sections are being updated to reflect the occurrence of the following adverse events in patients taking Ezetrol® (ezetimibe) alone or in combination with a statin:

  • myalgia;
  • rhabdomyolysis;
  • hepatitis;
  • acute pancreatitis;
  • thrombocytopenia; and
  • suspected interaction between Ezetrol® (ezetimibe) and warfarin 

In the U.S., however, Merck and Schering-Plough -- the drug companies responsible for Zetia, here -- chose not to send any corresponding Dear Doctor letter to American health care professionals, nor did the FDA mandate that they do so.

Returning to this 2005 Dear Doctor letter about Zetia, here is what was said about liver injuries to patients using Zetia and a statin drug (such as Zocor, Lipitor, Crestor, Lescol, Mevacor, or Pravachol):

Adverse hepatic events:

Elevations of liver transaminases and cases of hepatitis have been reported in patients treated with [Zetia]. Liver function monitoring is recommended when therapy with [Zetia] is initiated in patients treated or about to begin treatment with a statin.

Health care professionals should be aware that the use of [Zetia] in combination with a statin is contraindicated in patients with active liver disease or unexplained persistent elevations of liver transaminases.

In the two years since this 2005 Dear Doctor letter about Zetia was sent by the Merck and Schering group in Canada there have been some case reports of serious liver injury in patients using Zetia and statins -- but for the most part Zetia-induced liver injury had been off-the-radar for most drug safety observers. 

Now we have some idea about why, perhaps, Zetia-induced liver injury side effects were not more widely known.

In a December 21, 2007 article, "Data About Zetia Risks Was Not Fully Revealed", New York Times (NYT) reporter Alex Berenson broke the story that Merck and Schering-Plough had conducted several studies of Zetia which, in fact, raised the possibility that Zetia can cause liver damage when used long-term with other statins -- but these drug companies decided not to publish the results of those Zetia studies.

In preparing for his December 2007 Zetia article, the Times' reporter Alex Berenson spoke to a drug company representative and some medical doctors about this reporter's discovery of unpublished research about Zetia and liver-related side effects. 

We'll start with comments from two doctors who spoke with Mr. Berenson about this emerging drug safety issue:

“You don’t want to have data missing,” said Dr. Bruce Psaty, a professor of medicine and epidemiology at the University of Washington. “When there have been adverse effects, when the benefits don’t look impressive, those are the trials that historically don’t make it to press.”...

“We keep telling people we want to practice evidence-based medicine, and what we keep finding out is that much of the evidence is obscured,” said Dr. Harlan Krumholz, a cardiologist at Yale, when told about the previously undisclosed studies. “There is important evidence, but it’s not in public view. It’s hidden from investigators.”

On the other side of things, the Schering-Plough representative had this to say :

A Schering executive, when asked by a reporter about the unpublished [Zetia] studies, confirmed their existence. But the executive, Dr. Robert J. Spiegel, said the companies had not considered the [Zetia] studies scientifically important enough to publish their findings. Some may eventually be published, he said.

"We’re pretty comfortable that people don’t have trouble tolerating Zetia,” said Dr. Spiegel, the chief medical officer of the Schering-Plough Research Institute, Kenilworth, N.J.  (Emphasis added.)

In his December 2007 NYT article Mr. Berenson provides some reasons, however, why doctors and patients may not want to go along with this "reassurance" from Schering's Dr. Spiegel:

Most of the studies about Zetia in which Merck and Schering have published the results covered periods of only 12 weeks — not enough time for liver problems to develop in most patients....

But the F.D.A.’s documents show that Merck and Schering conducted several other long-term trials of Zetia without releasing their findings.

Together those studies cover several thousand patients who took Zetia along with statins for one to two years. The statins include Lipitor and Crestor, as well as Zocor, which is usually prescribed generically as simvastatin and is the statin used in the Vytorin pill....

The companies’ own published studies have generally played down the risk of liver problems. But Dr. Mark Stolk, a gastroenterologist in the Netherlands, last year reported two cases of patients who had developed hepatitis, a liver disease, after taking Zetia alongside Lipitor. One of the patients has since died, Dr. Stolk said in an interview last month. While Zetia is safe for most patients, doctors should carefully monitor patients for liver damage, he said.

“I think other cases will emerge,” he said.

What does the FDA have to say about this news reporter's discovery of unpublished studies suggesting that Zetia can cause serious liver injury when taken with statins?  Mr. Berenson tells us: "The agency did not respond to requests for comment."

To be sure, we will be reporting further developments as more is learned about the safety of Zetia -- one way or the other.

P.S.  Given how NYT reporter Alex Berenson discovered that Merck and Schering-Plough failed to publish some studies about Zetia and liver damage, Ed Silverman timely posted "How To Find Documents On The FDA Site" on his Pharmalot blog:

This cheat sheet should help you find briefing documents - the reams of supporting paperwork submitted by a drugmaker when seeking FDA approval for its med. It was compiled by a professor and students at the Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine’s School of Pharmacy and recently published in the letters section of The Annals of Pharmacotherapy.

Thanks Ed for this insight about how emerging drug-safety issues (like the NYT Zetia story) can be found and exposed.  (12/21/07)

P.S.   Dr. Aubrey Blumsohn, over at the Scientific Misconduct Blog, gives us his strongly worded opinion about the position asserted by Schering's medical director in the NY Times story about Zetia and Vytorin, which I have bolded above. 

In his post, "More problems with Ezetimibe (Zetia, Vytorin): Let there be light", Dr. Blumsohn writes:

... Dr. Spiegel, it's not your decision. When patients might die it's always "scientifically important".

In addition, Dr. Blumsohn provides links to some other articles about this emerging Zetia study data controversy.  (12/23/07)

Will New Black Box Warning About Heart Attacks Lead GlaxoSmithKline To Withdraw Avandia From Market?

One Wonders Whether GSK Might Do A "Soft" Recall Of Its Embattled Diabetes Drug, As Was Done By BMS With Serzone And Tequin In Recent Years

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

Avandia (rosiglitazone) is a prescription drug from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) approved by the FDA in 1999 to treat Type 2 diabetes.  As many people are aware now, while Avandia might have helped diabetic patients in some regards, it seems that this benefit comes at an increased risk of developing serious heart-related side effects including heart attacks and strokes.

The Avandia safety story started for most of us in May 2007, as follows:

On May 21, 2007 the Los Angeles Times published an Associated Press (AP) article entitled "Diabetes drug linked to heart attack risk" which broke the story about a new analysis of Avandia data that was published online earlier this same day by the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM).  The new Avandia article, "Effect of Rosiglitazone on the Risk of Myocardial Infarction and Death", by Steven E. Nissen, M.D., and Kathy Wolski, M.P.H., will appear in the June 14, 2007 print edition of the NEJM.

More recently, on November 6, 2007 Health Canada issued a MedEffect email alert about Avandia -- as well as the related Avandamet and Avandaryl -- to inform us that GlaxoSmithKline is informing Canadian doctors and patients about new restrictions on the use of its rosiglitazone products (Avandia, Avandamet and Avandaryl) due to "cardiac safety concerns".

More detail was provided in the November 2007 Public Communication document about Avandia posted by Health Canada:

  • Rosiglitazone (Avandia®) is no longer approved for use alone to treat type 2 diabetes, except when metformin* use is contraindicated or not tolerated.
  • Rosiglitazone is no longer approved for use with a sulfonylurea drug** (such as glyburide), except when metformin is contraindicated or not tolerated.
  • Rosiglitazone should not be used if you have heart failure, or have experienced heart failure in the past.
  • Patients who are taking rosiglitazone, especially those with underlying heart disease, or those who are at high risk of heart attack or heart failure, should talk to their doctor about the benefits and risks of continuing rosiglitazone therapy.

There was also a November 2007 "Dear Doctor" letter about Avandia posted on the Health Canada web site.

Two weeks before this news from Health Canada, in the U.S. the FDA had announced that it wanted Glaxo to add a "black box" warning about the increased heart attack associated with Avandia, according to an October 24, 2007 article in The Wall Street Journal, "Tougher Avandia Warning Is Urged":

Agency officials are pushing for a "black box" warning, [according to people with knowledge of the matter]. The new label is still being discussed with the company and its final form isn't yet clear. In high-profile safety matters, the agency tends to have strong leverage....

An FDA spokeswoman said the agency "is still involved in internal discussions on this matter" and that when there is a final decision it will become public. A GlaxoSmithKline spokeswoman said the company is "working diligently with the FDA to finalize the label, but it would be inappropriate for us to discuss the ongoing conversations with the agency."...

If it goes into effect, the new warning would focus on Avandia's potential for increased ischemic risk: a risk of events in which blood is choked off from the heart. An FDA analysis that crunched together multiple Avandia studies found that the drug appeared to be linked to a 38% higher risk of ischemic events....

When Avandia gets its new "black box" warning about increased heart attack risks, Avandia sales may be even further diminished going forward.  In turn, GlaxoSmithKline could follow the lead of Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) when that drug company experienced increasing scrutiny about the safety of its antibiotic Tequin in 2006.  Rather than do a Tequin safety recall, Bristol-Myers announced that it would stop marketing Tequin in the U.S. for "business" reasons -- which was very similar to what they did with their besieged anti-depressant drug Serzone back in 2004.

This new Big Pharma practice of withdrawing an alleged unsafe prescription drug for said-to-be business reasons (rather than safety reasons) could be called a "soft" recall.

We'll wait to see what Glaxo decides to do about its embattled diabetes drug as more is learned about Avandia side effects going forward.

Is This What Medtronic's March 21, 2007 "Dear Doctor" Letter Said About Sprint Fidelis Lead Problems?

One Person Took The Impression That Medtronic Was Trying To Lay Blame For Lead Wire Failures On Those Physicians Who Were Doing The Defibrillator Implants

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

To start, our thanks to a fellow in Florida who was kind enough to share with us what he found as a result of some investigation into that hard-to-find March 21, 2007 "Dear Doctor" letter about problems with Medtronic's Sprint Fidelis defibrillator leads. Unfortunately, his motivation came from the fact that he has one of the recalled Sprint Fidelis leads implanted currently. 

The following material comes from an April 8, 2007 article posted on a somewhat obscure blog called Random Thoughts on Pacemakers & Personal Finance that this fellow found after some looking-around on the Internet:

... On March 21st, Medtronic issued a "Dear Doctor" letter concerning higher than expected conductor fracture rates with the Sprint Fidelis lead. The Sprint Fidelis is Medtronic's premium defibrillation lead. It is the first sub-7 french ICD to be released (St Jude Medical released the Riata ST lead approximately 18 months after the Sprint Fidelis).

The body of the letter is as follows:

Dear Doctor,

Medtronic has received reports from a limited number of implanting physicians indicating they have experienced higher than expected conductor fracture rates in their centers with Sprint Fidelis leads. While current overall Sprint Fidelis performance is consistent with other leads, Medtronic is actively investigating these reports, has reviewed them with our Independent Physician Quality Panel, and would like to share what we know at this time.

Through detailed assessment of reported fractures, we have identified two primary locations where conductor fractures have occurred: 1) distal portion of the lead and 2) near the anchoring sleeve tie down. The distal conductor fractures affect the anode (ring electrode) and fractures that occur around the anchoring sleeve affect the cathode (helix tip electrode). Fractures at both locations appear to prsenet clinically as over-sensing, increased interval counts and inappropriate shocks. Medtronic has worked closely with physicians who have experienced fractures and conducted significant bench testing in an attempt to reproduce the fractures and identify root cause. At this point, our investigation suggests that variables within the implant procedure may contribute significantly to these fractures.

For distal conductor fractures, our investigation has identified severe bending or kinking of the distal end of the lead over the lead body while passing through tortuous vasculature as a significant contributing factor. If the lead is severely bent or kinked at the distal end, the conductor may be compromised such that the conductor may fracture after implant due to chronic fatigue from natural cardiac motion. The venous structure or pathway, venous access location, length of introducer sheath and lead insertion force are all factors that may contribute to sever bending or kinking of the lead. Medtronic recommends avoiding severe bending or kinking of the lead during implantation. If you encounter excessive resistance resulting in severe bending or kinking while advancing the lead, please remove the lead and return it to Medtronic.

For conductor fractures that occur around the suture sleeve, our preliminary investigation suggests that under certain implant techniques, the lead appears to be exposed to severe bending or kinking in the pectoral area. We are still investigating and actively partnering with physicians to better understand this type of fracture. If excessive kinking or bending is observed during lead suturing and/or pocket formation, Medtronic recommends the lead be re-sutured and/or pocket reassembled per guidelines in the Medtronic lead implant manual. In addition, positioning the anchoring sleeve against or near the vein may be helpful.

Sprint Fidelis lead models 6949, 6948, 6931, and 6930 were market released in the U.S. and internationally in September and October 2004. Performance of model 6949, the Sprint Fidelis lead currently followed in our System Longevity Study, indicated survival is 98.9% at two years. Sprint Fidelis 6949 performance based upon return product analysis shows 99.86% chronic fracture-free survival at two years. Both evaluation methods suggest performance is in line with other Medtronic leads and consistent with lead performance publicly reported by other manufacturers.

The unknown person who posted this April 8 article on the Random Thoughts on Pacemakers & Personal Finance blog then went on to make these comments regarding this March 2007 Dear Doctor letter from Medtronic about its Sprint Fidelis lead failures:

This letter was sent to all implanting U.S. physicians and nowhere was there any request for confidentiality. That is why I posted it.

Well, the lead fails and they state, "variables within the implant procedure may contribute significantly to these fractures." It's the implanter's fault. Of course, that makes perfect sense. The same physician who has implanted endocardial defibrillation leads since 1992 now suddenly doesn't know how to operate one of these new-fangled leads. Are they suggesting that for patients with a tortuous anatomy a different lead should be used - possibly a Sprint Quattro Secure? I don't know. What's going to happen if physicians get nervous and every time they try to implant the lead and "excessive kinking" occurs, they abandon the lead a try a different lead? Will returns to Medtronic increase?

Of course, if and when we learn that the (said-to-be) text of this March 21 Dear Doctor Sprint Fidelis letter from Medtronic which was posted on the Random Thoughts on Pacemakers & Personal Finance blog back in April 2007 is not accurate or correct somehow, we will let you know, immediately. 

Until then, this fellow in Florida seems to have found one of the pieces that might help us further fit together an evolving Sprint Fidelis story.

Cephalon Added Warning To Provigil Label About Serious Skin Reactions In August 2007

A "Dear Doctor" Letter About Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis Associated With Provigil Was Sent In September 2007

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

On October 24, 2007 the FDA sent an email alert to inform doctors and other healthcare providers that the drug company Cephalon issued a revised package insert, or label, for Provigil (modafinil) in August 2007.

According to this October 2007 FDA alert about Provigil:

  • Provigil is indicated to improve wakefulness in adult patients with excessive sleepiness associated with narcolepsy, obstructive sleep apnea/hypopnea syndrome, and shift work sleep disorder....  Healthcare professionals and consumers should also be aware that Provigil is not approved for use in pediatric patients for any indication.
  • The revised labeling updates safety information to include warnings regarding serious rash, including Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS) and hypersensitivity reactions, and psychiatric symptoms. Rare cases of serious or life-threatening rash, including Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis, and Drug Rash with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms have been reported in adults and children in worldwide postmarketing experience....  Physicians should instruct their patients to immediately discontinue the use of Provigil and contact them if a rash or other hypersensitivity reaction occurs.

Cephalon sent a so-called "Dear Doctor" letter about Provigil in September 2007 to convey this information about serious skin reactions such as SJS and TEN as well as to bring attention to the revised label for this sleep disorder drug.

As we had reported in September 2007, the Fall 2007 FDA Drug Safety Newsletter (Volume 1, Number 1) included a report that the FDA had been monitoring cases of serious skin rashes associated with Provigil.

Medtronic Sprint Fidelis Wire Leads Fracturing In Defibrillators May Have Caused Five Deaths

Events Leading Up To October 2007 FDA Recall Include A Little Noticed March 2007 "Dear Doctor" Letter And July 2007 Medical Journal Article About Model 6949

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

An October 16, 2007 article in The Wall Street Journal about the Fidelis Sprint leads recall presented the current situation:

In announcing the recall early yesterday, Medtronic said that its Sprint Fidelis leads have broken at a rate apparently higher than that of competing leads, including another from Medtronic....

When the lead fractures, it can have serious consequences: Some patients can receive unnecessary and massive shocks, sometimes compared to the jolt of sticking a fork in a light socket. Other patients don't get the shock when they do need it to save their lives after cardiac arrest. Overall, five patients so far have died in cases Medtronic says may be related to the flaw.

So far, 2.3% of the implanted leads have malfunctioned over a 30-month period studied by Medtronic since the device's introduction in the fall of 2004. Most of these thousands of malfunctions are fractures.

While this fracturing or breaking problem with the Sprint Fidelis wire lead was the subject of a little noticed (and hard to find, now) March 2007 "Dear Doctor" letter from Medtronic, this emerging medical device safety issue only began to get some real public notice in July 2007.

First, Dr. Robert G. Hauser and some of his colleagues had a paper published in the July 2007 edition of Heart Rhythm about the Sprint Fidelis model 6949 having a higher than expected lead failure at their facility.  From the Abstract for this paper, "Early failure of a small-diameter high-voltage implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead":

  • OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the performance of small-diameter Sprint Fidelis high-voltage ICD leads.
  • RESULTS: The survival of 583 Sprint Fidelis 6949 leads implanted at our center between September 2004 and February 2007 was significantly less than 285 Sprint Quattro Secure model 6947 leads implanted by us between November 2001 and February 2007 (P = .005). Six patients presented with Sprint Fidelis lead failure 4-23 months after implant. Five of the six patients experienced multiple inappropriate shocks associated with pace-sense conductor and coil fractures; the sixth patient had a fixation mechanism failure. The [United States Food and Drug Administration Manufacturers and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database] search rendered reports for 679 Sprint Fidelis leads. The most frequent complaints or observations were inappropriate shocks (33%), high impedance (33%), and fracture (35%). Of 125 leads analyzed by the manufacturer, 62 involved fracture of the pace-sense conductor or coil and the high-voltage (defibrillation) conductor.

Then, seemingly prompted by this medical journal article by Dr. Hauser, reporter Janet Moore of the Star-Tribune newspaper in Minnesota -- where Medtronic Inc. is headquartered -- picked up the Sprint Fidelis story in a July 30, 2007 article, "Medtronic device under scrutiny":

In late March [2007], Medtronic Inc. sent a letter to doctors advising them that the wire leads in a line of widely used heart defibrillators could tear at a "higher than expected" rate.

The "Dear Doctor" letter assured physicians that the performance of the Sprint Fidelis line of leads is consistent with similar products, and it offered suggestions about how to best implant it.

Four months later, several physicians in the Twin Cities have stopped using the leads, and Medtronic is investigating a patient's death in which a model of the Sprint Fidelis lead is "in question."

And it was Janet Moore at the Star-Tribune who apparently first reported on the Sprint Fidelis recall in her October 14, 2007 article, "Medtronic stops selling heart device":

Medtronic Inc. said today it has stopped selling a popular wire lead used with heart defibrillators because the lead may tear inside the body.

About 235,000 patients worldwide may be affected by the [Minnesota]-based company's action. Patients who believe they may have the device implanted in their chest should contact their doctor, but Medtronic does not recommend replacing it.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said it has classified Medtronic's action as a recall, which means Medtronic must stop selling the devices.

For those interested in learning more about what is known at present about the problems associated with Sprint Fidelis leads, we provide these resources:

October 15, 2007 Statement from FDA

October 15, 2007 Consumer Q&As from FDA

October 15, 2007 "Dear Doctor" Letter from Medtronic

October 15, 2007 News Release from Medtronic

We will continue to monitor and report what is learned about the relatively high rate of breaks or fractures in Sprint Fidelis leads used with defibrillators -- even though it is a bit off-topic for us -- because of its importance and because it seems to be closely / coincidentally related to our October 15, 2007 post: "How Should Drug Companies And Their Ad Agencies Respond To Safety Signals?"

P.S.  Insofar that the March 2007 "Dear Doctor" letter reported the five deaths possibly related to faulty Sprint Fidelis leads one must wonder did the FDA wait to long to issue its October 2007 recall?  (10/18/07)

P.S.   Now U.S. Representative Henry Waxman wants to know what the FDA knew about the Sprint Fidelis defibrillator lead wire fractures and when they knew it.  On October 22, 2007, as Chairman of Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, this California Congressman sent a letter to FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach requesting the Medtronic information which the FDA had access to before its October 2007 Sprint Fidelis recall.  (10/23/07)

Health Canada Issues Ketek MedEffect Alert In Early September 2007

Antibiotic Ketek Restricted To Certain Types Of Pneumonia; No Longer Used For Sinusitis, Bronchitis, Tonsillitis, Pharyngitis

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

On September 5, 2007 Health Canada issued by email a MedEffect alert about Ketek which included this summary:

Sanofi-aventis Canada, Inc. is informing Canadians that the antibiotic Ketek (telithromycin), should no longer be used to treat sinusitis, bronchitis, tonsillitis or pharyngitis. Ketek can still be used to treat certain types of pneumonia.

More information about these restrictions imposed on Ketek in Canada are set forth in the accompanying "PUBLIC COMMUNICATION Health Canada Endorsed Important Safety Information on KETEK (telithromycin)" and the the so-called "Dear Doctor" letter sent to health care professionals by Sanofi-aventis Canada Inc. on August 30, 2007.

From this Canadian Ketek Dear Doctor letter we get this more in-depth information about this change in indications for Ketek in Canada:

Upon review of the available safety information, including reported cases of severe liver injury, Health Canada has determined that the benefit-risk profile for KETEK® no longer supports its use for the treatment of acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis (AECB), acute bacterial sinusitis (ABS) or tonsillitis/pharyngitis. These indications will be removed from the label.

KETEK® continues to be indicated only for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) of mild to moderate severity due to Streptococcus pneumoniae, (including multi-drug resistant isolates [MDRSP]), Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis, Chlamydophila (Chlamydia) pneumoniae, Legionella pneumophila, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, and Staphylococcus aureus for patients 18 years old and older.

In view of the following developments regarding Ketek in the U.S., however, this action by Health Canada and Sanofi-aventis Canada seems relatively late:

Meanwhile, several product liability lawsuits regarding cases of serious liver injury allegedly caused by Ketek have been filed in various courts, here, during 2007.  We are not aware of any Ketek lawsuits filed in Canada but that is not to say that there are not any, there.

Parkinson's Disease Drug Permax Ordered Off The Market By Health Canada

Permax Was Voluntarily Withdrawn From the U.S. Market Earlier This Year At The Insistence of FDA

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

As you may recall, the Parkinson disease drug Permax was voluntarily withdrawn from the U.S. market in late March 2007 after studies in the New England Journal of Medicine underscored the increased risk of serious heart valve damage associated with Permax.

In Canada, however, Eli Lilly Canada Inc. had continued to sell Permax (pergolide). 

On August 16, 2007, however, Health Canada announced the sales of Permax must cease in their country as of August 30, 2007

In more detail, from a MedEffect Public Communication about Permax issued on August 16, 2007, we get this information about why Health Canada has taken this action:

  • Two studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) in January 2007 showed that patients with Parkinson's disease who were treated with Permax had an increased chance of serious heart valve damage when compared to patients who did not receive the drug. [footnotes omitted] In light of this recent information, Health Canada has determined that there is not enough evidence to support the continued safe use of Permax as currently recommended in the prescribing information.
  • Eli Lilly Canada Inc., in co-operation with Health Canada, will stop sales of Permax (pergolide mesylate) in Canada as of August 30, 2007 due to the potential for cardiac valvulopathy, a condition involving inflammation or stiffening of the heart valves. Pharmacies may continue to sell Permax after that date to allow patients sufficient time to consult with their healthcare providers and to transition to an alternative medication.

Eli Lilly Canada Inc. has sent a so-called "Dear Doctor" letter to Canadian healthcare providers about Permax informing them that sales of this Parkinson's disease drug will stop in Canada as of August 30.  This Permax Dear Doctor letter also gives advice for discontinuation and transition to alternative medications for Canadian patients currently taking Permax.

Drug Safety Update: A Promising New Monthly Electronic Bulletin From The UK's Drug Agency

First Issue Includes Updated Advice Regarding Dostinex; Now A Second-Line Treatment Due To Increased Risk Of Serious Heart Valve Damage

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

In the United Kingdom (UK) the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), and its independent advisor the Commission on Human Medicines (CHM), have replaced Current Problems in Pharmacovigilance, which was previously sent in hard copy to certain healthcare professionals, with a new monthly electronic bulletin called Drug Safety Update.  According to an introduction in its first issue, this bulletin is intended to provide useful information for a wide range of healthcare professionals, such as doctors, pharmacists, nurses, and dentists.

The first issue of Drug Safety Update, August 2007, included a short but informative piece with current advice about prescribing Dostinex (cabergoline). 

As background, Dostinex and Permax (pergolide) are ergotamine dopamine agonists that have been associated with cardiovalvulopathy and other fibrotic adverse drug reactions.  As reported previously, studies done in 2006 and 2007 put the spotlight on serious cardiac side effects associated with Dostinex and Permax.  These studies ultimately led to Permax being withdrawn from the U.S. market in March 2007.

The August 2007 Drug Safety Update article about Dostinex sets forth this updated prescribing advice from a so-called "Dear Doctor" letter about Dostinex (known as Cabaser in the UK) sent during April 2007:

  • The indication for cabergoline has been restricted to second-line treatment in
    patients who are intolerant, or do not respond, to treatment with a non-ergot
    compound. Cabergoline can be given in this restricted setting as monotherapy or
    as an adjunct to levodopa plus dopa-carboxylase inhibitor
  • Cabergoline is contraindicated in patients with a history of pulmonary, pericardial,
    or retroperitoneal fibrotic disorders, or in those with anatomic evidence of
    cardiovalvulopathy
  • Monitoring for development of valvular disease or fibrosis is recommended.
    Echocardiography should be done within 3–6 months of starting treatment, and
    should be done at least every 6–12 months thereafter

Based on this first issue, we will look forward to receiving the new Drug Safety Update bulletin from the MHRA each month, hopefully for many years to come.

Sanofi-Aventis Sends "Dear Doctor" Letter Regarding Antibiotic Ketek In Late March 2007

The Letter Concerns Black-Box Warning, Prescribing Changes, And Patient Medication Guide Announced Back In Mid-February 2007

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

On March 26, 2007 the FDA announced that a so-called "Dear Doctor" letter regarding the antibiotic Ketek (telithromycin) has been sent by Sanofi-Aventis to healthcare professionals alerting them to new safety information for Ketek.

As one may recall, in mid-February 2007 the FDA and Sanofi-Aventis announced some important new prescribing and safety information for Ketek.  This important information was to be disseminated by several means, including a new package insert, or label, for Ketek that would have a black-box warning and label changes regarding the new prescribing guidelines as well as some associated side effects; in addition, there was a detailed medication guide for patients.  A summary of those items follow:

  • The black-box warning states that Ketek is contraindicated in patients with pre-existing myasthenia gravis, a disease that causes muscle weakness;
  • The antibiotic Ketek should be prescribed for community-acquired pneumonia, only, and should no longer be used as treatment for acute bacterial exacerbation of chronic bronchitis nor acute bacterial sinusitis.
  • As for the other label changes, warnings were strengthened for hepatotoxicity (liver injury), loss of consciousness, and visual disturbances associated with Ketek; and,
  • The new Patient Medication Guide is intended to let patients know about the risks of Ketek and how to use this antibiotic safely.

To our knowledge, no explanation was issued by the FDA nor Sanofi-Aventis about why there was an apparent six-week delay in sending out this March 2007 Dear Doctor letter regarding the important Ketek safety information that was first raised by them back in February 2007.

My Photo

RSS Feed

  • FeedBurner

Email Delivery

Let Us Know


Sponsored By

Case Review

Featured On

Bookmarking

  • Add to Technorati Favorites
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Poll: Federal Preemption -- Good or Bad Policy?

Resources

  • Drug Interaction Checker
    Program alerts patients to some drug-drug interaction possibilities when taking two or more prescription drugs.
  • FDA MedWatch
    MedWatch is the U.S. FDA site for safety information on prescription drugs and other medical products.
  • Health Canada MedEffect
    Health Canada's MedEffect site provides drug product safety announcements and other information for patients.
  • Medication Errors Reporting Program (MERP)
    Submit a confidential report to national voluntary program.
  • NIH MedlinePlus
    MedlinePlus will direct you to information that will help answer health questions.
  • Patient Medical Records Copying Cost Statutes
    State statutes that control what amount can be charged when patient requests their own medical records in U.S.
  • PDRhealth.com
    Based on most trusted database of prescription drug information, Physicians’ Desk Reference.
  • PharmedOut
    Intended to help prescribers identify and counter inappropriate pharmaceutical promotion practices.

Sites to See

Search Engine

  • Google

    WWW
    www.drug-injury.com

Affiliations

  • BlogBurst.com

Blog Archives

Common Feed

  • FeedBurner

Custom Feeds

  • Add Drug Injury Watch to Newsburst from CNET News.com

  • Add to My AOL

  • Subscribe in NewsGator Online

  • Add to Google

  • Subscribe in Bloglines

HitTail.com

Disclaimer


  • DRUG INJURY WATCH is for general information purposes only, and should not be regarded as medical advice or legal advice.... (For more, please see the About page.)

See You Again