Want to contact a Washington, DC Bextra attorney? ...Get a free case evaluation from one of our Washington, DC Bextra attorneys now.

Pfizer Respectfully Disagrees with FDA Decision on Bextra

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

In April 2005, the Federal Drug & Food Administration (FDA) asked Pfizer Inc. to suspend sales of Bextra. Pfizer halted the sales of Bextra because the FDA determined that the health risks associated with the drug outweighed the prescription's benefits. It has been estimated that 7 million patients were prescribed Bextra and that approximately 12.9 million prescriptions were written for Bextra in 2004. Bextra is a prescription COX-2 selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID).

Pfizer Inc. withdrew Bextra because of concerns that it caused increased heart attacks, strokes and a potentially fatal skin disease, Stevens Johnson Syndrome. At the time the FDA asked for Bextra’s removal the agency also said it would require tougher safety warnings on all NSAIDs, including the medications Celebrex, Mobic, Aleve and Motrin.

Bextra is in the same class of drugs as Merck & Co's drug Vioxx, the COX-2 inhibitor pain reliever whose withdrawal from the market in September 2004 started the analysis of patient signals that Vioxx, like Bextra, caused increased rates of heart attacks and strokes in some people who took the medication. Although Merck initiated its own Vioxx withdrawal, Pfizer withdrew Bextra from the market reluctantly and at the time voiced concerns that the FDA was changing how it judged the value of medications. Pfizer chose to respectfully disagree with FDA’s position regarding the overall risk/benefit profile of Bextra.

In May 2005, in response to media inquiries, Pfizer issued the following statement:

“As previously communicated, Pfizer has suspended sales of Bextra (valdecoxib) pending further discussions with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Pfizer continues to believe that Bextra could be an important treatment option for certain patient populations. In the future, the company plans to discuss options with the FDA under which Bextra might be made available to those patients. “

Upon further review, the FDA informed Pfizer that, in the agency’s view, Bextra’s cardiovascular (CV) risk could not be differentiated from other NSAIDs.  However, the agency concluded that the additional, increased risk of rare but serious skin reactions associated with Bextra (already described on its label) warranted its withdrawal from the market. These skin reactions included Stevens Johnson Syndrome, which is a rare, life-threatening reaction to medication – one of the most devastating of all adverse drug reactions.

Stevens Johnson Syndrome is characterized by inflammation of the mucous membranes of the mouth, throat, eyes, genital tract and intestinal tract. Ulcers inside the mouth are the most common, causing inflammation and irritation to the tongue, gums, and lips and can extend into the throat. Affected individuals may also have skin lesions, blisters and bleeding in the lips, eyes, mouth, nasal passage and genital areas. As SJS evolves, the skin literally sloughs off in sheets. Patients are typically treated in a hospital’s burn unit. If the skin lesions become infected, or the patient develops lesions in the lungs, it can cause death.

Bextra was originally prescribed to arthritis sufferers to relieve symptoms of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. It was also prescribed to women in hopes of relieving PMS and painful menstrual cycles. A November 2004 study, presented to American Heart Association indicated that patients who took Bextra were more than twice as likely (as non-users) to suffer heart attacks or stroke. The study involved almost 6,000 patients, some who took Bextra and some who were given a placebo. To date, several COX-2 inhibitors have been banned due to the increased risk of stroke, heart attack, stomach ulcers, liver damage, and severe skin reactions among patients.

Some classes of patients were always at a higher risk of side effects and complications when taking Bextra. This includes patients immediately post-operative from cardiovascular bypass surgery (CABG) and people who had coronary artery disease (people who have known angina or who have had a heart attack), people who had cerebrovascular disease, people who have had a stroke or who currently have episodes known as TIA (transient ischemic attacks), and people with a history of stomach ulcers. It has been suggested that patients in these classes who were prescribed Bextra should consult with a specialist even if they did not have any immediate adverse side effects.

If you or a family member has suffered serious side effects or a fatal injury such as a heart attack or stroke after using Bextra, you or the family member may be eligible to file a claim against the drug manufacturer. Contact an attorney to discuss your legal rights.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

 

Close (x)

Looking for an Attorney?


Please type your question:

Close (x)

logo Find Legal Help for Your Bextra Case - Submit Your Information Below

Do you need legal assistance with your Bextra case?
LegalView may be able to help.


Submit your information below for a free, no-cost evaluation.

We'll submit your information to one of our partner firms.
LegalView's partners represent clients throughout the United States, for a very wide range of legal issues. Submit your information now, to see if one of LegalView's partners can help!

* Indicates Required Fields

First name *
Last name *
Email Address *
Phone Number *
()  -

State *
Legal Issue * Unsafe Drugs: Bextra Change
Was There an Injury?
Please Describe The Injury

DISCLAIMER and STATEMENT OF NON-CONFIDENTIALITY

By submitting this form, you agree that completing the above is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship.

Disclosure

Legal WebTV Network LLC, LegalView.com, and LegalWebMedia.com are group advertising sponsored by the attorneys identified here. It is not a lawyer referral service. If you submit information on this website [more...]

Legal WebTV Network LLC, LegalView.com, and LegalWebMedia.com are group advertising sponsored by the attorneys identified here. It is not a lawyer referral service. If you submit information on this website, LegalWebMedia.com will submit your information to the law firms that pay for this group advertising and to respond to your requests for information concerning legal services in their assigned local areas. If there is no sponsoring firm in your state, your inquiry will be submitted to one of the sponsoring law firms on a predetermined, rotating basis. If the sponsoring law firm accepts your case, it will associate with licensed attorneys practicing in your state, if required; the sponsoring law firm may also contact other law firms to see if they may be able to assist.

The information provided by the LegalView.com and LegalWebMedia.com websites is for advertising and informational purposes and should not be considered as legal advice from the sponsoring attorneys. The websites contain general information and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts, or settlements. LegalView.com contains information created by others or supplied through open forums; the sponsoring law firms are not responsible for the accuracy of this information. Any person viewing or receiving information from these websites should not act or refrain from acting on the basis of any such information without first seeking appropriate legal advice from an attorney in your area. Legal WebTV Network, LLC expressly disclaims any liability with respect to actions taken or not taken by the recipient based on any or all of the information or contents contained in these websites.

Any information sent to Legal WebTV Network LLC through this website is done using standard Web encryption techology. LegalView.com will exercise all reasonable care, within technological limits, to protect the confidentiality of any information submitted via Internet e-mail or through this website. By accessing this website, you may be seeking an attorney to represent you or legal advice. However, none of the sponsoring attorneys represent you yet.

The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements.

Any transmission of information, whether via Internet e-mail or through the website, is solely for evaluation purposes by the sponsoring law firms and their associates. The transmission of any information to any attorney sponsoring advertising on LegalView.com or LegalWebMedia.com does not create an attorney-client relationship between the sender and any recipient. An attorney-client relationship can only be created by a written, signed-fee agreement entered into with an attorney. The sponsoring attorneys will treat your information as a confidential communication for the purpose of obtaining legal services or legal advice.

For more information about the sponsoring law firms, please click here.

This form is secure and encrypted. More information about secure forms and your privacy here.