Newly licensed drugs
- 9 November 1996
- Vol. 313 (7066) , 1157-1158
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.313.7066.1157
Abstract
Firstly, the licensing process cannot define uncommon adverse effects. It is easier to measure common therapeutic benefits than rare, but important, reactions. The numerical problem is daunting. If n patients have been treated, and none has suffered a particular adverse effect, then we can be 95% sure that the true incidence of that adverse effect is between 0/n and 3/n.1 Licensing decisions are based on trials involving on average around 1500 patients,2 so at the time of licensing, a serious reaction that affects as many as 1 in 500 patients could be undetected, and undetectable. Britain's Committee on Safety of Medicines asks for “yellow card” reports of any reactions to newly licensed medicines, marked with an inverted black triangle. A post marketing surveillance scheme, which monitors prescriptions and adverse events, exists only in general practice. Both schemes rely on the good will of prescribers rather …Keywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- Long term use of lamotrigine and vigabatrin in severe refractory epilepsy: audit of outcomeBMJ, 1996
- Drug trials in epilepsyBMJ, 1996
- Storage and disposal of embryos and gametesBMJ, 1996
- Cost effectiveness of lowering cholesterol concentration with statins in patients with and without pre-existing coronary heart disease: life table method applied to health authority populationBMJ, 1996
- Growth in the use of antibiotics in the community in England and Scotland in 1980-93BMJ, 1996
- Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease with Pravastatin in Men with HypercholesterolemiaNew England Journal of Medicine, 1995
- Probability of adverse events that have not yet occurred: a statistical reminderBMJ, 1995
- Health care: what's science got to do with it?BMJ, 1995
- Pharmacovigilance: paradise lost, regained or postponed? The William Withering Lecture 1994.1995