Pink Sheet is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction
UsernamePublicRestriction

ORAL HYPOGLYCEMIC DRUGS "REPORTED" ASSOCIATION WITH CARDIOVASCULAR DEATH WILL BE REQUIRED IN LABELING FOR CLASS OF AGENTS, FDA FINAL RULE STATES

Executive Summary

Oral hypoglycemic drug labeling that states there is a "reported" link between the drugs and increased cardiovascular mortality will be required by FDA, the agency said in a final rule published in the April 11 Federal Register. Under the heading "SPECIAL WARNING ON INCREASED RISK OF CARDIOVASCULAR MORTALITY," the labeling states: "The administration of oral hypoglycemic drugs has been reported to be associated with increased cardiovascular mortality as compared to treatment with diet alone or diet plus insulin." The label change become effective in six months. The labeling notes that the warning is "based on the study conducted by the University Group Diabetes Program (UGDP), a long-term prospective clinical trial designed to evaluate the effectiveness of glucose-lowering drugs in preventing or delaying vascular complications in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes." The UGDP study, involving 823 patients randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups, found that "patients treated for five to eight years with diet plus a fixed dose of tolbutamide (1.5 grams per day) had a rate of cardiovascular mortality approximately 2-1/2 times that of patients treated with diet alone," the labeling states. The warning culminates a 14-year debate over how the FDA should handle the UGDP findings. FDA announced its basic agreement with the UGDP study in May 1970 and proposed labeling requirements in July 1975. In 1972 the Cmte. on the Care of the Diabetic filed suit asking that FDA be enjoined from requiring labeling changes based on the UGDP study and was granted a temporary restraining order. Additional proceedings by the cmte. led to a preliminary injunction restraining implementation of the labeling changes. In view of criticism of the UGDP study's design and statistical analysis, the Natl. Institute of Arthritis, Metabolism, & Digestive Diseases financed an assessment by the Biometric Society. FDA later conducted its own audit for the study, which was made available in November 1978. After consideration of the entire record, FDA said it believes "the findings reported by UGDP constitute reasonable evidence of an association between the use of oral hypoglycemic drugs and increased cardiovascular mortality." The revised labeling notes that "despite controversy regarding the interpretation of these results, the findings of the UGDP study provide an adequate basis for this warning." FDA will not require, as originally proposed, that use of oral hypoglycemic drugs be limited to patients who cannot take insulin, nor is the warning statement required to be enclosed in a box. In addition, the statement that administration of oral hypoglycemic drugs "may be" associated with increased cardiovascular mortality has been changed to "has been reported to be" associated with increased cardiovascular mortality. Labeling also advises that "the patients should be informed of the potential risks and advantages of (name of drug) and of alternative modes of therapy." FDA noted that the labeling proposed in 1975 applied to two classes of oral hypoglycemics, the sulfonylurea class which includes tolbutamide, chlorpropamide, acetohexamide, and tolazamide, and the biguanide class which at that time included only phenformin. FDA withdrew the NDA for phenformin in November 1978 under the imminent hazard clause of the FD&C Act because of its association with lactic acidosis. Therefore, the agency said, the regulation and guideline labeling are specific for the sulfonylureas.

You may also be interested in...



Part D Discount Liability Coming Into Focus: CMS Releases Drug Cost Data

Newly released Medicare Part D data sheds light on the sales hit that branded pharmaceutical manufacturers will face when the coverage gap discount program gets under way in 2011

FDA Skin Infections Guidance Spurs Debate On Endpoint Relevance

FDA appears headed for a showdown with clinicians and the pharmaceutical industry over the proposed new clinical trial endpoints for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, the guidance's approach for justifying a non-inferiority margin and proposed changes in the types of patients that should be enrolled in trials

Shire Hopes To Sow Future Deals With $50M Venture Fund

Specialty drug maker Shire has quietly begun scouting deals with a brand-new $50 million venture fund, the latest of several in-house investment arms to launch with their parent company's pipelines, not profits, as the measure of their worth

UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

LL033172

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel