BMJ  2004;329:867-868 (16 October), doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7471.867

Editorial

Lessons from the withdrawal of rofecoxib

Patients would be safer if drug companies disclosed adverse events before licensing

The history of the development and marketing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs is both fascinating and frightening. It offers a strange combination of stunning commercial successes and dramatic calamities, the latest concerning the recently withdrawn drug rofecoxib (Vioxx).1

In the 1960s research showed that salicylates were good for pain relief in rheumatoid arthritis, but as with steroids, their use was limited by toxicity.2 So the major pharmaceutical companies developed non-salicylate, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Over the subsequent 40 years we have seen a procession of new agents come and go, each one being heralded as either more efficacious or less toxic than its competitors. As new NSAIDs appeared, the indications steadily broadened from inflammatory diseases to almost any painful condition. Each time a new drug was launched the market expanded, resulting in annual estimated sales of more than $20bn (£11.1bn; {euro}16.1bn) worldwide.2

The first big problem with a new NSAID occurred in the 1980s with benoxaprofen (Opren).3 This drug, developed by Eli Lilly, was marketed on the basis of a unique mode of action. But it soon became clear that its use was associated also with novel adverse events, including photosensitivity and hepatotoxicity. The company went on actively marketing the drug until forced to withdraw it when several older people had died of liver failure after using benoxaprofen.4

Now we confront a similar, but arguably more serious, problem with new NSAIDs. In the early 1990s two isoforms of cyclo-oxygenase were discovered, with distinct patterns of expression, COX-1 and COX-2.2 The anti-inflammatory properties of NSAIDs were said to be related to inhibition of COX-2, whereas gastrointestinal adverse effects occurred because of a COX-1 inhibition5—giving remarkable emphasis to the gastrointestinal toxicity of NSAIDs, while largely ignoring other adverse events.6

One of the first NSAIDs to be heavily marketed as a COX-2 selective inhibitor, capable of efficacy without serious toxicity, was celecoxib (Celebrex). Pfizer still promotes this agent on the basis of the CLASS study,7 despite the fact that this pivotal trial has been discredited,8 and that doubts have been cast on the selectivity of celecoxib.2 A subsequent agent was rofecoxib (Vioxx) produced by Merck Sharp & Dohme. While the corresponding landmark trial, VIGOR,9 provided robust evidence for rofecoxib's gastrointestinal safety, it raised concerns about its cardiovascular toxicity (figure), including a particularly worrying increase in the risk of myocardial infarction (relative risk 5.00, 95% confidence interval 1.72 to 14.29).2 10



View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Kaplan-Meier estimates for serious thrombotic cardiovascular adverse events observed in the VIGOR trial (reference 9), which was published in 2000 (relative risk for rofecoxib versus naproxen 2.37, 95% confidence interval 1.39 to 4.06; reference 2). Adapted from Li Q. Statistical reviewer briefing document for the advisory committee, 2001. www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/briefing/3677b2_04_stats.pdf (accessed 30 Sep 2004)

 

On the basis of purely theoretical reasoning—and in the absence of any evidence from randomised controlled trialsw1—Merck proposed that the explanation for the observed difference in rates of myocardial infarction was the cardioprotective potential of the comparator drug used in VIGOR, naproxen.w2 A press release on 22 May 2001 was entitled "Merck reconfirms favorable cardiovascular safety of Vioxx." Numerous publications by Merck's consultants and employees supported this notion.w2 Now, nearly four years after publication of VIGOR, Merck has withdrawn rofecoxib because of its cardiovascular toxicity, quoting the results of an as yet unpublished, placebo controlled, long term trial as their reason for taking this action.1

We have three concerns. Firstly, the "Vioxx story" indicates that we urgently need to determine whether the cardiovascular effects of rofecoxib are a class effect applicable to all COX-2 selective inhibitors—and if so, how selective the COX-2 inhibition needs to be to have this adverse effect. Secondly, we believe that the current widespread use of NSAIDs for non-inflammatory pain has to be reconsidered. Thirdly, we must find ways of preventing further similar episodes (box).


Suggested measures to ensure drug safety before definite licensing of a drug

  • Legal requirement for drug companies to register all randomised controlled trials prospectively
  • Legal requirement for drug companies to make all data on serious adverse events from clinical studies publicly available immediately after study completion
  • Continuously updated systematic reviews of adverse events based on published and unpublished data from randomised controlled trials and observational studies
  • Phased introduction of new interventions in independent, large scale, randomised trials before definite drug licensing
  • Clear cut financial firewalls between pharmaceutical companies and researchers performing systematic reviews and clinical studies


Single phase III drug trials are simply not big enough to detect relatively uncommon but important adverse events, which may affect large numbers of people in routine clinical use.6 The potential public health impact of previously undetected drug related adverse events is likely to be made worse if widely marketed new drugs are prescribed haphazardly and rapidly to large numbers of people. Within five months of the launch of rofecoxib, more than 42 000 patients had been prescribed the drug in England,11 even though newly marketed drugs carry a black triangle warning, indicating an incomplete safety profile. Unfortunately, postmarketing surveillance is not a panacea to determine safety, as methodological flaws may produce inaccurate results.

We therefore recommend that drug companies are legally required to make all data on serious adverse events from clinical studies available to the public immediately after completion of the research. This will allow independent, timely, and updated systematic reviews of serious adverse events. In addition, we advocate the phased introduction of new interventions through randomised trials, which are independent from the pharmaceutical industry and are large enough to study rare outcomes, together with systematic, more robust, and comprehensive approaches to pharmacovigilance.12 Although these measures will not be popular with pharmaceutical companies, they will limit the numbers of patients exposed unsystematically to unknown hazards and provide robust and unbiased evidence on adverse events before a drug is licensed fully.

Paul A Dieppe, director

MRC Health Services Research Collaboration, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PR (p.dieppe{at}bristol.ac.uk)

Shah Ebrahim, head of department, Richard M Martin, senior lecturer in epidemology and public health

Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol

Peter Jüni, senior research fellow in clinical epidemiology

Departments of Social and Preventive Medicine and Rheumatology, University of Berne, CH-3012 Berne, Switzerland

{webplus.f1}Additional reference w1 and w2 are on bmj.com

Competing interests: SE is coordinating editor of the Cochrane Heart Group, which produces systematic reviews not funded by the pharmaceutical industry of the effects of interventions for heart diseases. RMM worked at the Drug Safety Research Unit between 1997 and 1999, during which time the unit received unconditional donations from pharmaceutical companies.

References

  1. Merck announces voluntary worldwide withdrawal of VIOXX®. News release. Whitehouse Station, NJ: Merck, 2004. www.vioxx.com/vioxx/documents/english/vioxx_press_release.pdf (accessed 30 Sep 2004).
  2. Jüni P, Dieppe P. Older people should NOT be prescribed "coxibs" in place of conventional NSAIDs. Age Ageing 2004;33: 100-4.[Free Full Text]
  3. Smith R. Medical journals and pharmaceutical companies: uneasy bedfellows. BMJ 2003;326: 1202-5.[Free Full Text]
  4. Taggart HM, Alderdice JM. Fatal cholestatic jaundice in elderly patients taking benoxaprofen. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 1982;284: 1372.
  5. Kargman S, Charleson S, Cartwright M, Frank J, Riendeau D, Mancini J, et al. Characterization of Prostaglandin G/H Synthase 1 and 2 in rat, dog, monkey, and human gastrointestinal tracts. Gastroenterology 1996;111: 445-54.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  6. Dieppe P, Bartlett C, Davey P, Doyal L, Ebrahim S. Balancing benefits and harms: the example of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. BMJ 2004;329: 31-4.[Free Full Text]
  7. Silverstein FE, Faich G, Goldstein JL, Simon LS, Pincus T, Whelton A, et al. Gastrointestinal toxicity with celecoxib vs nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. The CLASS study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000;284: 1247-55.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Jüni P, Rutjes AW, Dieppe PA. Are selective COX 2 inhibitors superior to traditional non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs? BMJ 2002;324: 1287-8.[Free Full Text]
  9. Bombardier C, Laine L, Reicin A, Shapiro D, Burgos-Vargas R, Davis B, et al. Comparison of upper gastrointestinal toxicity of rofecoxib and naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. VIGOR Study Group. N Engl J Med 2000;343: 1520-8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Mukherjee D, Nissen SE, Topol EJ. Risk of cardiovascular events associated with selective COX-2 inhibitors. JAMA 2001;286: 954-9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Layton D, Riley J, Wilton LV, Shakir SA. Safety profile of rofecoxib as used in general practice in England: results of a prescription-event monitoring study. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2003;55: 166-74.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  12. Waller PC, Evans SJ. A model for the future conduct of pharmacovigilance. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003;12: 17-29.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

COX 2 inhibitors, traditional NSAIDs, and the heart
Peter Jüni, Stephan Reichenbach, and Matthias Egger
BMJ 2005 330: 1342-1343. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Sentinel systems are needed for long term adverse drug reactions
Torbjörn Callréus
BMJ 2005 330: 255-256. [Extract] [Full Text]

Lessons from the withdrawal of rofecoxib: Observational studies should not be forgotten
Godfrey Oakley, Jr
BMJ 2004 329: 1342. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Lessons from the withdrawal of rofecoxib: France has policy for overall assessment of public health impact of new drugs
Lucien Abenhaim
BMJ 2004 329: 1342. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Tscholl, P, Junge, A, Dvorak, J (2008). The use of medication and nutritional supplements during FIFA World Cups 2002 and 2006. Br. J. Sports. Med. 42: 725-730 [Abstract] [Full text]  
  • Merry, A. F. (2008). Ethics, Industry, and Outcomes. SEMIN CARDIOTHORAC VASC ANESTH 12: 7-11 [Abstract]  
  • Zhang, J., Ding, E. L., Song, Y. (2006). Adverse Effects of Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors on Renal and Arrhythmia Events: Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials. JAMA 296: 1619-1632 [Abstract] [Full text]  
  • Dieppe, P. (2006). Complicity theory: an explanation for the ;coxib problem'?. JRSM 99: 273-274 [Full text]  
  • Price-Forbes, A. N., Callaghan, R., Allen, M. E., Rowe, I. F., on behalf of the West Midlands Rheumatology Servic, (2005). A regional audit of the use of COX-2 selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in rheumatology clinics in the West Midlands, in relation to NICE guidelines. Rheumatology (Oxford) 44: 921-924 [Abstract] [Full text]  
  • Juni, P., Reichenbach, S., Egger, M. (2005). COX 2 inhibitors, traditional NSAIDs, and the heart. BMJ 330: 1342-1343 [Full text]  
  • Solomon, S. D., McMurray, J. J.V., Pfeffer, M. A., Wittes, J., Fowler, R., Finn, P., Anderson, W. F., Zauber, A., Hawk, E., Bertagnolli, M., the Adenoma Prevention with Celecoxib (APC) Study, (2005). Cardiovascular Risk Associated with Celecoxib in a Clinical Trial for Colorectal Adenoma Prevention. NEJM 352: 1071-1080 [Abstract] [Full text]  
  • Abbasi, K. (2005). Pills, thrills, and bellyaches. BMJ 330: - [Full text]  
  • Callreus, T. (2005). Sentinel systems are needed for long term adverse drug reactions. BMJ 330: 255-256 [Full text]  
  • Oakley, G. Jr (2004). Lessons from the withdrawal of rofecoxib: Observational studies should not be forgotten. BMJ 329: 1342-1342 [Full text]  
  • Abenhaim, L. (2004). Lessons from the withdrawal of rofecoxib: France has policy for overall assessment of public health impact of new drugs. BMJ 329: 1342-1342 [Full text]  
  • (2004). Hit parade. BMJ 329: 1350-1350 [Full text]  
  • Bjordal, J. M., Ljunggren, A. E., Klovning, A., Slordal, L. (2004). Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, including cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors, in osteoarthritic knee pain: meta-analysis of randomised placebo controlled trials. BMJ 329: 1317- [Abstract] [Full text]  
  • Fontanarosa, P. B., Rennie, D., DeAngelis, C. D. (2004). Postmarketing Surveillance--Lack of Vigilance, Lack of Trust. JAMA 292: 2647-2650 [Full text]  
  • (2004). Robin Goodfellow (43-12). Rheumatology (Oxford) 43: 1598-1598 [Full text]  

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Don't Forget Observational Studies
Godfrey Oakley, Jr.
bmj.com, 15 Oct 2004 [Full text]
What about the study 'subjects'?
Chris MH Hiley
bmj.com, 15 Oct 2004 [Full text]
Independent trials of new interventions
Lawrence A Emtage
bmj.com, 15 Oct 2004 [Full text]
role of NICE guidelines?
Chris Ducker
bmj.com, 16 Oct 2004 [Full text]
Out patient review of patients on rofexcoxib
badal pal, et al.
bmj.com, 18 Oct 2004 [Full text]
BMJ COX'S UP
Faiyaz Mohammed
bmj.com, 20 Oct 2004 [Full text]
No surprises over Vioxx
Paul Cracknell
bmj.com, 22 Oct 2004 [Full text]
Be vigilant
Christopher Anton
bmj.com, 22 Oct 2004 [Full text]
The new French paradigm : the Public Heath Impact Assessment of Drugs
Lucien Abenhaim
bmj.com, 24 Oct 2004 [Full text]
Withdrawal of a drug have more clinical and ethical perspectives
Juan Carlos Maldonado, et al.
bmj.com, 29 Oct 2004 [Full text]
Vioxx controversy -- Lancet publishes unscientific meta-analysis of rofecoxib studies
Jeffrey Mann
bmj.com, 9 Nov 2004 [Full text]
COXIBs' cardiovascular effects
Mario Guslandi
bmj.com, 19 Nov 2004 [Full text]
Risk reduction in patients taking NSAIDS and COX-2 inhibitors
James A McGuigan
bmj.com, 29 Nov 2004 [Full text]
Access jobs at BMJ Careers
Whats new online at Student BMJ