CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Related articles in CJA
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stafford-Smith, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Stafford-Smith, M.
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia 54:77 (2007)
© Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society, 2007


Correspondence

REPLY

Mark Stafford-Smith, MD

Duke University Medical Center, Durham, USA, E-mail: staff002{at}mc.duke.edu

Dr. McConachie highlights many important additional issues regarding the current low confidence (internationally) in the safety evaluation process as part of drug development that was reviewed in the recent issue of the Journal.1 These concerns exist not just for COX-2 inhibitors and, as pointed out in the letter, the line is blurred where acceptable side effects merge with unacceptable safety issues (e.g., gastrointestinal bleeding with aspirin). While the COX-2 inhibitor story continues to develop,2 national institutions charged with drug development are beginning to respond. Subsequent to publication of the editorial, a report from the United States Food and Drug Administration lists eight major problem areas and makes five recommendations to improve drug safety evaluation.3 The proposed reforms focus upon empowering the agency with legislation, expertise and funding, and improvements in the process of drug safety review, including instituting a "conditional approval" or probationary period, that would place expectations on the company for completion of required studies before full endorsement. The European Medicine Evaluation Agency is contemplating a similar one-year conditional approval, while France, Japan and Norway have instituted two and four-year post-approval safety reviews for all drugs.3 Hopefully, public health and public trust will be improved by these changes in the drug development process.

References

1 Stafford-Smith M. Hurry up and slow down: Lessons in drug development from the COX-2 inhibitors/Se hater et ralentir: les lecons a tirer de la production des inhibiteurs de la COX-2. Can J Anesth 2006; 53: 973–7.[Free Full Text]

2 Furberg CD. The COX-2 inhibitors--an update. Am Heart J 2006; 152: 197–9.[Medline]

3 Furberg CD, Levin AA, Gross PA, Shapiro RS, Strom BL. The FDA and drug safety: a proposal for sweeping changes. Arch Intern Med 2006; 166: 1938–42.[Abstract/Free Full Text]


Related articles in CJA:

Lessons in drug development
Ian McConachie
CJA 2007 54: 76-77. [Full Text]  




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Related articles in CJA
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stafford-Smith, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Stafford-Smith, M.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS