PTT職涯區 / medstudent (醫學生)

Re: [新聞] 糖尿病藥梵帝雅 有條件續用

看板medstudent (醫學生)作者 (哇哈哈)時間15年前 (2010/07/16 19:56), 編輯推噓2(2推 0噓 9→)
留言11則, 4人參與, 最新討論串2/2 (看更多)
: 推 c2yuan:這是class effect吧﹗？只要同類藥都一樣才對... 07/16 12:53 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/13/health/policy/13avandia.html?_r=1 Avandia’s success was crucial to SmithKline, whose labs were otherwise all but barren of new products. But the study’s results, completed that same year, were disastrous. Not only was Avandia no better than Actos, but the study also provided clear signs that it was riskier to the heart. But instead of publishing the results, the company spent the next 11 years trying to cover them up, according to documents recently obtained by The New York Times. The company did not post the results on its Web site or submit them to federal drug regulators, as is required in most cases by law. -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 123.192.172.15
→
07/17 00:21, , 1F
紐時八卦起來口吻其實不輸小報嘛...jama最新的這篇有提到
07/17 00:21, 1F
→
07/17 00:23, , 2F
http://tinyurl.com/2clz2wb 不知道為何不是class effect
07/17 00:23, 2F
推
07/17 13:20, , 3F
感謝, 不過樓上這篇只能說Rosiglitazone比Pioglitazone
07/17 13:20, 3F
→
07/17 13:21, , 4F
有較高的stroke....風險, 並不代表Pioglitazone是正常...
07/17 13:21, 4F
推
07/17 13:25, , 5F
Both thiazolidinediones have been shown to increase the
07/17 13:25, 5F
→
07/17 13:26, , 6F
risk of heart failure compared with treatment
07/17 13:26, 6F
→
07/17 13:26, , 7F
with placebo or other antidiabetes medications
07/17 13:26, 7F
→
07/17 13:27, , 8F
(以上為文章內的一段話...)
07/17 13:27, 8F
→
07/17 13:28, , 9F
可以看該篇文章33,34的REFERENCES
07/17 13:28, 9F
→
07/17 17:14, , 10F
heart failure之外其他是否class effect恐怕證據還不夠
07/17 17:14, 10F
→
07/25 19:00, , 11F
希望對您有幫助 http://www.94istudy.com
07/25 19:00, 11F
‣ 更多 hahawow 的文章
文章代碼(AID): #1CG4a2Hh (medstudent)
討論串 (同標題文章)
本文引述了以下文章的的內容：
完整討論串 (本文為第 2 之 2 篇)：
排序： 最新先 | 最舊先 | 留言數
在新視窗開啟完整討論串 (共2篇)
medstudent 近期熱門文章
更多 近期熱門文章 >>
PTT職涯區 即時熱門文章
更多 即時熱門文章 >>
‣ 更多 hahawow 的文章
文章代碼(AID): #1CG4a2Hh (medstudent)