Seroxat and the suppression of clinical trial data: Regulatory failure and the uses of legal ambiguity

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 107-112

  McGoey, L ^a   Jackson, E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIDEPRESSANT AGENT; PAROXETINE;

BIOETHICS; CLINICAL TRIAL; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG INDUSTRY; ETHICS; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LEGAL ASPECT; MEDICAL ETHICS; MORALITY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; REVIEW; STANDARD; UNITED KINGDOM;

ANTIDEPRESSIVE AGENTS, SECOND-GENERATION; BIOETHICAL ISSUES; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; CLINICAL TRIALS DATA MONITORING COMMITTEES; DISCLOSURE; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG INDUSTRY; ETHICS, MEDICAL; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MORAL OBLIGATIONS; PAROXETINE;

EID: 59949096453     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: 14734257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jme.2008.025361     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. MHRA. Publication of responses to MLX 350 clarifying when marketing authorisation holders should report new information which might influence the evaluation of the benefits and risks for a medicine to the MHRA. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/NewsCentre/CON028540 (accessed 12 Nov 2008).
2. MHRA. PressRelease,6Mar2008. Availableat http://www.mhra.gov.uk/ Howweregulate/Medicines/Medicinesregulatorynews/CON014153 (accessed 12 Nov 2008).
3. Power M. Organized uncertainty: designing a world of risk management. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
4. MHRA. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/index.htm (accessed 12 Nov 2008).
5. McGoey L. The value of ignorance: antidepressant drugs and the politics of objectivity in medicine. LSE doctoral study 2007.
6. MHRA. Assessment report: paroxetine (Seroxat) 4 June 2003. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Howweregulate/Medicines/Medicinesregulatorynews/ CON014153 (Accessed 12 Nov 2008).
7. Kondro W. Drug company experts advised staff to withhold data about SSRI use in Children. Can Med Assoc J, 2004;170:783.
8. GlaxoSmithKline. Seroxat/Paxil adolescent depression: position piece on the phase III clinical studies. Available at http://www.ahrp.org/ risks/SSRI0204/GSKpaxil/index.php (accessed 12 Nov 2008).
9. Health Select Committee. Fourth report 2004-5 session. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmhealth/42/4202.htm Minutes of evidence, 9 September 2004 (accessed 11 Nov 2008).
10. Abraham J. Science, politics and the pharmaceutical industry: controversy and bias in drug regulation. London/New York: UCL/St Martins Press, 1995:70-4.
11. MHRA. MHRA investigation into GlaxoSmithKline/Seroxat 6 March 2008. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Howweregulate/Medicines/ Medicinesregulatorynews/CON014153 (accessed 12 Nov 2008).
12. Abraham, J. Transnational industrial power, the medical profession and the regulatory state: adverse drug reactions and the crisis over the safety of Halcion in the Netherlands and the UK. Soc Sci Med 2002;55:1671-90.
13. Abraham J, Lewis G. Harmonising and competing for medicines regulation: how healthy are the EU's systems of drug approval? Soc Sci Med 1999;48:1655-67.
14. McGoey L. On the will to ignorance in bureaucracy. Econ Society 2007;36:212-35.
15. Abraham J, Lewis G. Regulating medicines in Europe: competition, expertise and public health. London: Routledge, 2000:49-80.
16. Mossialos E, Mrazek M, Walley T. Regulating pharmaceuticals in Europe: striving for efficiency, equity and quality. Buckingham: Open University Press, 2004.
17. Abraham J, Davis C. Interpellative sociology of pharmaceuticals: problems and challenges for innovation and regulation in the 21st century. Technol Anal Strateg Manage 2007;19:387-402.
18. Harris G. At FDA, strong drug ties and less monitoring. New York Times 6 Dec 2004. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/06/health/06fda.html (accessed 12 Nov 2008).
19. Breckenridge A, Woods K. Medicines regulation and the pharmaceutical industry. BMJ 2005;321:834-6.
20. Jackson E. Medical Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
21. Abraham J. Making regulation responsive to commercial interests: streamlining drug industry watchdogs. BMJ 325 2002 1164-6.
22. Medawar C, Hardon A. Medicines out of control? Antidepressants and the conspiracy of goodwill. Amsterdam: Askant, 2004:200-13.
23. Healy D. Let them eat Prozac: the unhealthy relationship between the pharmaceutical industry and depression. New York: New York University Press, 2006.
24. Abraham J, Sheppard J. Complacent and conflicting scientific expertise in British and American drug regulation: clinical risk assessment of Triazolam. Soc Stud Sci 1999;29:803-43.
25. Demortain D. From drug crises to regulatory change: the mediation of expertise. Health Risk Soc 2008;10:37-51, 48.
26. Abraham J. Distributing the benefit of the doubt: scientists, regulators and drug safety. Sci Technol Human Values 1994;19:493- 522.
27. Kendall T, McGoey L. Truth, disclosure, and the influence of industry on the development of NICE guidelines: an interview with Tim Kendall. BioSocieties 2007;2:129-41.
28. MRHA. Letter to GSK. Available at http://www.mhra.gov.uk/ Howweregulate/Medicines/Medicinesregulatorynews/CON014153 (accessed 12 Nov 2008).