- Janice Hopkins Tanne
- 1New York
Researchers and editors claim in two papers and an editorial this week that Merck, the makers of the arthritis drug rofecoxib (Vioxx), misrepresented study results and used ghostwriters to prepare manuscripts for journal publication.
The authors of the articles have drawn their evidence from thousands of documents released during lawsuits against Merck over adverse events related to the drug (JAMA 2008;299:1800-12, 1813-7, and 1833-5).
Rofecoxib was withdrawn worldwide in September 2004 after a study showed that it doubled the risk of heart attack or stroke if it was taken for more than 18 months (BMJ 2004;329:816; doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.7470.816-a).
Merck said in a statement that it “believes that many of the comments in a Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) news release and in the 16 April 2008 issue of JAMA related to Vioxx are false, misleading, or lack context.”
The statement said, “The articles, based on analyses of documents conducted by consultants hired by trial lawyers as part of their work in the Vioxx product liability litigation, make allegations similar to …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record







CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Ventilator associated pneumonia
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Restless legs syndrome
Published 30 May 2012
Author's reply
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Full access to trial data holds many benefits and a few pitfalls, conference hears
Published 30 May 2012
Restless Legs Syndrome: Fact or Fiction
Published 30 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 15:42
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27