Man, talk about kicking a drug when it’s already dead. Almost makes me feel bad for Pfizer.
Related posts:
- Peter Rost on why Exubera is a flop
- Desperate Pfizer going with ads to save failing Exubera
- ADA on Exubera
- Exubera: Stick a fork in it
- Exubera fallout: Breakup by press release
- Why Exubera failed
- Exubera: "Another blow for the bong"
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 3 comments }
Big surprise- the lungs don’t like foreign particles? Color me shocked. They knew it wasn’t all absorbed. They knew it caused lung damage (thought not how much).
Christine,
Your healthy scepticism is appreciated, but in this case I don’t believe this is a big pharma cover up. According to the report, 6 out of 4,740 patients treated with the Exubera got lung cancer compared to 1 patient out of 4,292 who did not; and all seven patients had a history of smoking. This is hardly clear cut evidence of a link to lung cancer. The reason Pfizer in cooperation with the FDA volunteered to change their label was due to liability. Though they gave up their patent rights and no longer market the drug, some patients are still takaing the remaining supply of Exubera. Putting the warning in ASAP (even if the risk isn’t clear) potentially protects them from future law suits, and since they are not selling the drug any more, they have nothing to lose.
Eh, I don’t think it was a cover up. I think it wasn’t used long term enough to fully appreciate the side effects. If they know a drug isn’t fully absorbed, and they know it decreased respiratory function, malignancies do seem like a logical next step.
But, like you say, they were all smokers. I wonder why smokers were in the study at all, as I believe smoking was a contraindication to Exubera.
Comments on this entry are closed.