作者hahawow (哇哈哈)
看板medstudent
標題Re: [新聞] 糖尿病藥梵帝雅 有條件續用
時間Fri Jul 16 19:56:47 2010
: 推 c2yuan:這是class effect吧﹗？只要同類藥都一樣才對... 07/16 12:53
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/13/health/policy/13avandia.html?_r=1
Avandia’s success was crucial to SmithKline, whose labs were otherwise all
but barren of new products. But the study’s results, completed that same
year, were disastrous. Not only was Avandia no better than Actos, but the
study also provided clear signs that it was riskier to the heart.
But instead of publishing the results, the company spent the next 11 years
trying to cover them up, according to documents recently obtained by The
New York Times. The company did not post the results on its Web site or
submit them to federal drug regulators, as is required in most cases by law.
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 123.192.172.15
1F：→ rambler:紐時八卦起來口吻其實不輸小報嘛...jama最新的這篇有提到 07/17 00:21
3F：推 c2yuan:感謝, 不過樓上這篇只能說Rosiglitazone比Pioglitazone 07/17 13:20
4F：→ c2yuan:有較高的stroke....風險, 並不代表Pioglitazone是正常... 07/17 13:21
5F：推 c2yuan:Both thiazolidinediones have been shown to increase the 07/17 13:25
6F：→ c2yuan:risk of heart failure compared with treatment 07/17 13:26
7F：→ c2yuan:with placebo or other antidiabetes medications 07/17 13:26
8F：→ c2yuan:(以上為文章內的一段話...) 07/17 13:27
9F：→ c2yuan:可以看該篇文章33,34的REFERENCES 07/17 13:28
10F：→ hahawow:heart failure之外其他是否class effect恐怕證據還不夠 07/17 17:14