NEWS    RECALLS    COMPLAINT FORM    SCAM ALERTS   RESOURCES  
Small Claims Guide   Class Actions   Lemon Laws   FAQ   Newsletters  
Share


Complain about a product or service

Automotive    Education    Employment    Electronics    Family    Finance    Health    Homeowners    Insurance    Pets    Shopping    Travel     Print This     Email This    



NEWS   Latest |  Archives |  Auto |  Cells, etc. |  Computers |  Financial |  Health |  Homeowners |  Parents |  Privacy |  Scams |  Seniors |  Travel

Data Missing from Vioxx Study, Medical Journal Finds





December 9, 2005

Related Stories


Pfizer Pays Record $2.3 Billion Settlement Over Illegal Marketing Charges
Court Snuffs Vioxx Suit
Pfizer Pays $894 Million to Settle NSAID Claims
Researchers Claim Vioxx Safety Study Was Actually Marketing Plan
First Vioxx Judgment Overturned On Appeal
Merck Agrees to Pay $58 Million to Settle Vioxx Claims
Researchers Claim Merck Cooked Vioxx Data
Common Pain Relievers May Boost Muscle Mass
More Painkillers Can Cause More Pain
Merck Caves, Agrees To $4.85 Billion Vioxx Settlement
New York Sues Vioxx Maker over Drug’s Risks
Merck Wins Vioxx Case In Illinois
Judge Rules Out Vioxx "Super" Class Action
FDA Critic Blasts Merck's Vioxx Replacement
Merck Loses New Orleans Vioxx Case
Merck Wins Latest Vioxx Suit
Vioxx Study Authors Backtrack On Claim
Older Painkillers May Increase Heart Attack Risk
More about Vioxx
---
Other NSAIDs
Bextra
Celebrex
Dangers of Other Vioxx-Type Drugs
Vioxx Alternatives
Aleve Ingredient Seen as Health Risk

The prestigious New England Journal of Medicine said that data about three Vioxx patients who suffered heart attacks was removed from a Merck & Co. study, making the painkiller look safer than it should have.

Merck is fighting more than 6,500 lawsuits filed on behalf of patients who allegedly suffered heart attacks after taking Vioxx, withdrawn from the market in September 2004 after a study found an increased risk of heart attacks after 18 months of use.

The medical journal said the omitted data "call into question the integrity of the data." But Merck said in a statement that the omitted cases were not included in the study because they occurred after a "pre-specified cutoff date." It said the study "fairly and accurately" described the results of the drug trial.

The data about the three heart attacks was included in information provided to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and in other materials. Merck insisted that the missing heart attacks did not change the overall conclusions of the study published in the New England Journal.

The journal said in its editorial that adding the missing cases back into the study data would mean that Vioxx patients were five times more likely to suffer a heart attack than those taking naproxen. As originally published, the study presented the relative risk as 4.25 times greater.

The development came as a jury in Houston began deliberating on evidence presented in the third Vioxx trial.

In the Houston case, Evelyn Irvin Plunkett alleges that Vioxx caused the 2001 fatal heart attack of her husband, Richard, who took the drug for less than a month to treat back pain.



Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.

Share

Follow us on Twitter.

FREE CONSUMER NEWSLETTERS

The Daily Consumer
Afternoons M-F

Sign up now!


Consumer News & Alerts
Every Sunday

Sign up now!





CONSUMER NEWS

SAFETY RECALLS

Back to the top |

Advertisement


Custom Search
AUTOMOTIVE
• Dealers
• Manufacturers
• Service
• Extended Warranties
• Lemon Laws
• Recalls
• Tires
• Transporters

FAMILY
• Aging
• Children, Parenting
• Recalls
• Dating
• Education
• Entertainment
• Pets
• Weddings
FINANCE
• Annuities
• Banks
• Credit Cards
• Debt Collection
• Debt Counseling
• Insurance
• Investing
• Loans
• Mortgages
• Payday Loans
• Student Loans
• Tax Prep

HEALTH
• Doctors
• Drugs, Pharmacies
• Health Clubs
• Hearing Care
• Hospitals
• Nursing Homes
• Nutrition, Diets
• Vision Care
• Weight Loss
HOUSE & HOME
• Appliances
• Cookware
• Furniture
• Home Improvements
• Lawn & Garden
• Movers
• Pools & Spas
• Realtors, Rental Agents
• Recalls
• Utilities

ELECTRONICS
• Cable TV/DBS
• Cameras
• Cell Phones
• Computers
• Home Electronics
• Internet Access
• Local Phone Service
• Long Distance
• VoIP
SHOPPING
• In-Home
• Online
• Retail Stores
• Sporting Goods
• Supermarkets
• Telemarketers

TRAVEL
• Airlines
• Bus Lines
• Car Rental
• Cruises
• Hotels
• Travel Agents
• Trains

RESOURCES
• Class Actions
• Complaint Form
• Small Claims Guide
• Lemon Laws
CONSUMER NEWS
• Latest News
• Automotive
• Telecom
• Financial
• Health
• Homeowners
• Scams
• Seniors
• Travel
• More ...

RECALLS
• Automotive
• Children's Products
• Drugs
• Food
• Household Products
• Sporting Goods

ABOUT US
• FAQ
• Privacy Policy
• Advertise With Us
• Newsroom
• Syndication
• Terms of Use

Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use

Advertisements on this site are placed and controlled by outside advertising networks. ConsumerAffairs.com does not evaluate or endorse the products and services advertised. See the FAQ for more information.

Company Response Welcome If complaints about your company appear on our site, we welcome your response. Please see the Response Form for more information.

For more information, see the FAQ and privacy policy. The information on this Web site is general in nature and is not intended as a substitute for competent legal advice.  ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. makes no representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use thereof. 

Copyright © 2003-2009 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc.  All Rights Reserved.    The contents of this site may not be republished, reprinted, rewritten or recirculated without written permission.