The Story Of Our Firm | En Español
 Home    Lawyers   Litigation   Choose Us   Settlements   Search

Drugs Avandia Research Center

Secret Avandia Vote

in this section: Firm's Press Release, 10.1.07 | Another FDA Warning? 10.24.07 | avandia drug warning | Study Reveals Risks, 6.6.07 | FDA Warning, 5.22.07 | Secret Avandia Vote | Veterans Affairs: Avandia | FDA Approval of Avandia | NEJM Study | Warning Letter, 2001 | Sales Plunge | NEJM Update, 6.5.07 | FDA Safety Information | FDA Warning, 6.6.07 | Scientists Silenced | Dallas Lawsuit | Patients Switch Meds | Avandia Prescriptions Fall | Updated Study, 7.12.07 | Avandia Panel, 7.25.07 | Second Black Box? | Senators Testify | Experts Cite Risks | Black Box Warning | 9.12.07 Study Analysis | Actos Study | Arkansas Lawsuit | Weakens Bones | JAMA Report, 12.7.07 | Avandia Diabetes Pills | Avandia Warning

Bookmark This Page Print This Page Email This Page

Secret FDA Avandia Vote Outrages Senator--Begs Questions on Procedure

October 31, 2007, New York, NY— A high-ranking Republican Senator has learned that an internal panel of government safety experts recently voted in a private meeting to keep Type 2 diabetes drug Avandia on the market by a sliver-thin margin of 8-7. Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa wants answers to why the Food and Drug Administration’s Drug Safety Oversight Board (DSOB) did not disclose this vote to the public, which took place on October 2, 2007, according to Reuters.

“This is yet another example of how patients are kept in the dark about how close a pharmaceutical comes to being withdrawn from the market,” said Arthur Luxenberg, partner of personal injury law firm Weitz & Luxenberg, P.C. “Both the FDA and GlaxoSmithKline had an obligation to fully inform the public of Avandia’s heart risks. There are growing questions about who knew what and when.”

The public at large only learned of Avandia’s link to a significant increase in the risk of heart attack in June 2007, after the New England Journal of Medicine published that finding in a combined analysis of more than 40 studies.

Following that report, the FDA announced in June that the toughest so-called “black-box warning” label would be placed on Avandia for its link to heart failure. This move was overshadowed, however, by the discovery that FDA safety reviewers reportedly recommended taking that urgent step more than a year earlier. The FDA is currently weighing whether to add a separate warning label for heart attack, according to the Wall Street Journal. This label would hobble GlaxoSmithKline’s contention that Avandia is just as safe as its competitors. Its leading drug rival, Actos, does not have a warning for heart-attack risk.

If you or a loved one has suffered cardiac complications after ingesting Avandia, you deserve the guidance of a knowledgeable drug attorney. Get a free case review by filling out the form below.

Click To Talk To Us Online

Please complete the following questionnaire:

When did you start taking Avandia?
What cardiovascular problems did you experience with the drug?
What was the date you experienced cardiac complications?
Did you have any cardiovascular disease before taking Avandia?
Do you smoke?
How did you learn of Weitz & Luxenberg?
Contact Name
Email Address
Phone Number (optional)


see also:

Senators Testify Senators Testify in Investigation That FDA Pulled Reviewer off Avandia
Avandia Scientist Says in Investigation that the FDA Removed Him

Updated Study, 7.12.07 Latest News on Avandia: German Study Adds More Reasons to Avoid it
Latest Study in the News: Avandia May Worsen Complications of Diabetes

News & Warnings Avandia Breaking News: Glaxo Warned in 2001 about Misleading Marketing
Bloomberg News: FDA Warned Glaxo about Avandia Marketing in 2001

Name Phone Email
Do you have a legal question? Ask us!   strictly confidential
Your Question

Click here
for a free case review

$53 million verdict — brake mechanic suffering from mesothelioma

$13.5 million verdict — one of the very first Vioxx trial cases

$15 million settlement — man wound up a paraplegic due to negligent hospital care

$37 million verdict — 2 asbestos lung cancer plaintiffs

$47 million verdict — boilermaker who died from mesothelioma

$75 million verdict — historic consolidated trial involving men who had worked at the Brooklyn Navy Yard in the 1940s and 1950s

$12.7 million verdict — iron worker who was injured due to unsafe working conditions

$64.65 million award — 4 asbestos plaintiffs

$17.5 million — consolidated trial of 5 mesothelioma victims

$25 million jury verdict — brake reliner

$5.8 million settlement — failure to perform timely C-Section

$30 million verdict — 7 former power-plant workers suffering from asbestos-related illnesses

$6 million settlement — pediatric malpractice case

$14 million consolidated verdict — 5 asbestos-related cancer suits: shipyards/powerhouses/construction

$8 million settlement — obstetrical malpractice resulted in neurological deficits

$3.5 million — 2 asbestos exposure cases

$600,000 settlement — motor vehicle negligence resulting in serious injury

$44 million verdict — 5 asbestos cases, including $11.6 million awarded to widow of sheet metal worker who died of mesothelioma

$1.6 million settlement — suicide after premature hospital discharge

$2.6 million settlement — ill-fitting prosthesis caused decubitus ulcers

$1.5 million settlement — construction worker fell off elevated train tracks

$750,000 settlement — defective construction equipment resulted in serious injury to worker


Ask a Free Question:
Were you injured?

check for your response [login]
For legal help anywhere in the U.S.
A nationally-recognized personal injury law firm, Weitz & Luxenberg is committed to helping clients win cases, get the compensation to which they’re entitled and continue with their lives. In just over 20 years, we’ve collected more than $1.3 billion for plaintiffs.