Xarelto Approval For AF Stroke Risk Reduction Tested FDA’s Comparative Efficacy Powers, But Conservative View Prevailed
Executive Summary
J&J/Bayer’s Xarelto tested the limits of FDA’s policy on comparative efficacy, thanks to suboptimal use of the active comparator, warfarin, and the introduction of a new competitor, Pradaxa. In the medical reviewers’ view, new therapies should be as effective as existing therapies used skillfully, but division leadership would withhold approval only if the new drug were clearly inferior to approved agents.
You may also be interested in...
Xarelto Liability Suit: Is Label 'Silent' About Increased Bleeding Risk?
Even after multiple bellweather wins, Janssen and Bayer still face claims they did not warn doctors about concomitant use with Plavix and aspirin; as case begins in Philadelphia, plaintiff's attorney tells jury the firms were 'silent,' while defense points to doctors' testimony that a different warning would not have changed their prescribing.
FDA Panel Looks Beyond Xarelto’s Missing Data Problems To Broader Reforms
Despite the agency’s decision to limit discussion about missing data to the ATLAS pivotal trial of rivaroxaban, Cardio-Renal advisory committee members suggested reforms that sponsors should consider to prevent the kinds of problems seen in ATLAS.
Boehringer Will Test How Pradaxa Stacks Up To The Competition In Real-World Study
Global observational study is assessing real-world experience with Pradaxa and other anticoagulants in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation who are at risk of stroke. Results are due in 2020.