Are Regulatory Decisions Evidence-Based?
Author Information
Author(s): Curt D Furberg
Primary Institution: Wake Forest University School of Medicine
Hypothesis
Are the regulatory agencies rigorously ensuring that decisions are evidence-based?
Conclusion
Regulatory agencies have not recognized the significant differences in cardiovascular risks among non-selective NSAIDs, leading to potentially harmful miscommunications to the public.
Supporting Evidence
- The FDA Advisory Committee concluded that selective COX-2 inhibitors increase the risk of thrombotic cardiovascular events.
- The EMEA recommended suspension of valdecoxib and added contraindications for other coxibs based on the same evidence.
- The FDA's Black Box warning for celecoxib was vague compared to the EMEA's recommendations.
Takeaway
Some pain medications can be more dangerous than others for your heart, but the people in charge of making rules about these medicines aren't always clear about the risks.
Methodology
The commentary discusses findings from various clinical trials and regulatory agency decisions regarding NSAIDs.
Potential Biases
Potential bias in regulatory agency decisions due to differing interpretations of the same evidence.
Limitations
The commentary does not provide new experimental data but critiques existing regulatory decisions.
Statistical Information
Confidence Interval
95% CI 0.67 to 1.26 for naproxen; 95% CI 0.96 to 2.37 for ibuprofen; 95% CI 1.12 to 2.37 for diclofenac; 95% CI 0.81–1.05 for COX-2 inhibitors vs diclofenac; 95% CI 1.21 to 2.03 for COX-2 inhibitors vs naproxen.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website