New Study Questions Avandia's Heart Risk

Analysis finds no proof that diabetes drug causes heart attacks

By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter

Related Encyclopedia • Acidophilus • Addison's Disease • Alzheimer's Disease • Aneurysms More... Related Healthscout Videos Nutrition and Cancer Nutrition and Osteoporosis Importance of Good Nutrition Controlling Incontinence More... Related Animations • Alzheimer's Disease Video Animation • Angioplasty • Coronary Bypass Surgery • Diabetes More... Related Drug Information • Accupril • Actonel • Actos • Altace More... Related News Articles • Flu Vaccine Doesn't Protect Seniors From Pneumonia • Taking Depression to Heart • Immune System Protein Predicts Toxic Shock Survival • Creatine Has Negligible Effect on COPD Exercise Rehab More...

WEDNESDAY, Aug. 8 (HealthDay News) -- The debate over the heart-attack risks posed by the type 2 diabetes drug Avandia has taken another twist, with a new study questioning the results of the research that kick-started the controversy.

In a study published June 14 in the New England Journal of Medicine, heart expert Dr. Steven E. Nissen, chairman of the Cleveland Clinic's department of cardiovascular medicine, reported a 43 percent increased risk of heart attack among patients taking Avandia (generic name rosiglitazone). Nissen said he uncovered that risk among 42 studies of the drug that he had analyzed.

Text Continues Below

---

However, a new analysis of that same data finds no proof of a significant risk of heart attack.

"We don't have sufficient data to adjudicate the association of rosiglitazone with increased cardiovascular risk," said lead researcher Dr. Sanjay Kaul, a cardiologist and professor of medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles. "The data that was analyzed does not allow us to conclude definitively whether the risk of heart attack with rosiglitazone is increased or decreased."

Kaul, who published his findings online Aug. 7 in Annals of Internal Medicine, and his colleagues reexamined the same trials that Nissen had used in his study. Kaul said he found that Nissen's analysis excluded trials that should have been included -- trials that would have lowered the risk of heart attack because none occurred.

In addition, Kaul said, those trials weren't designed to assess the safety of Avandia, and they were too short to establish whether there was a long-term risk for heart attack. "The number of events was very small," Kaul said. "One can legitimately raise the question whether you can predict long-term outcomes looking at short-term clinical trials."

To really answer the question about the potential heart risks associated with Avandia, there needs to be long-term trials specifically designed to see if the drug increases the chances of heart attack, Kaul said.

Page:  1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >>