Below is an email I've sent to the editor of the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry [JAACAP]
It follows on from the recent abhorrent behaviour of British pharmaceutical company, GlaxoSmithKline and their agreement to plead guilty with regard to the way they knowingly misbranded Paxil and knowingly falsified a ghostwritten study [329] for the sole purpose of making money from a product that had a propensity to induce suicide in children and adolescents.
A call for this fraudulent study to be retracted has previously been asked for by Jon N. Jureidini and Leemon B. McHenry, whom are both mentioned and referenced below.
I've previously called for Glaxo CEO, Andrew Witty, to contact JAACAP, seeing how it was his company that hired a ghostwriter for the article.
His limp-wristed excuse that this was part of an era just doesn't wash. If he had any morals then he would tell the journal to pull the study, although the damage has been done now and many children may have died as a result of this study being published.
More about Witty coming soon on this blog... there's some disgruntled whistleblowers out there.
Anyway, here's the email to the editor of the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.
Dear Mr Martin,
I am the author of the book, The evidence, however, is clear; the Seroxat scandal, and the blog, Seroxat Sufferers. Seroxat is the UK brand name for GlaxoSmithKline's antidepressant, you will know it by its US brand name, Paxil.
The reason I am contacting you is with regard to the publication in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry entitled, "A Multi-center, Double-blind, Placebo Controlled Study of Paroxetine and Imipramine in Adolescents with Unipolar Major Depression." - Martin Keller et al.
It is my understanding that the particular study was used as a marketing tool by British pharmaceutical giants, GlaxoSmithKline, and was in fact not written by the authors, Martin Keller et al, at all but by Sally Laden, an editorial director for Scientific Therapeutics Information.
Given that this publication has been widely available since 2001 its safe to assume that many inquiring doctors, pediatrics, child psychiatrists and, in general, healthcare professionals, have used it as a guide when making a decision whether or not to prescribe Paxil off-label to children and adolescents.
It is also my understanding that the study, better known as Paxil 329, has been brought to your attention in the past by Jon N. Jureidini and Leemon B. McHenry and despite pointing out to you Paxil 329'S flaws you refused to retract it. In fact, you added that, “We have found no evidence for such errors nor any justification for retraction according to current editorial standards and scientific publication guidelines. We therefore will not proceed further with your request” [1]
I am sure you are aware of recent events regarding GlaxoSmithKline's guilty plea surrounding the illegal marketing and promotion of many of their products, one of which was Paxil.
Glaxo agreed to plead guilty to distribution of a misbranded drug due to false and misleading labeling, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 331(a), 333(a)(1) & 352(a). That 'misbranded drug' was Paxil.
Transcripts of GSK's plea and settlement agreements are available on the Department of Justice website. [2]
Regarding Paxil and their guilty plea, Glaxo settled allegations that:
From 1999 to 2003, during sales calls, dinner meetings, spa programs, lavish weekend conferences to places such as Puerto Rico and Hawaii, through a false and misleading medical journal article, and through the distribution of free samples for patient use, GSK promoted Paxil to doctors for the treatment of depression and, to a lesser extent, obsessive-compulsive disorder in patients under age 18.
and
That they conducted three placebo-controlled clinical studies to study Paxil’s safety and efficacy in treating depression in patients under age 18. In all three studies, GSK failed to demonstrate efficacy on the endpoints identified in the study protocols.
and
That they hired a contractor to write an article on one of the studies that was published in July 2001 in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (JAACAP). The article stated that Paxil “is generally well tolerated and effective for major depression in adolescents.” The article did not explicitly state that the study failed to demonstrate efficacy on either of its two primary endpoints or on any of the secondary endpoints that had been identified in the study protocol.
and
There marketing team distributed the JAACAP article to all of the Paxil sales representatives with a cover memo that stated that Paxil had demonstrated “REMARKABLE Efficacy and Safety in the treatment of adolescent depression.” Some GSK sales representatives used the article to urge doctors to prescribe Paxil to treat patients under age 18.
Given that they have pleaded guilty one would assume that the next natural step would be for the study to be retracted. I gather the responsibility falls upon you to issue such an order.
Can you tell me if you plan to retract "A Multi-center, Double-blind, Placebo Controlled Study of Paroxetine and Imipramine in Adolescents with Unipolar Major Depression." - Martin Keller et al, and/or issue an explanation as to why you wish to retract it?
If you plan not to retract it could you please explain why?
Could you please also state, for the record, that your position is that you can still see no evidence of errors nor any justification for retraction according to current editorial standards and scientific publication guidelines.
Meantime, I look forward to your reply and hope that you will find it in your heart to remove this fraudulent publication as a goodwill gesture to the parents of children that have killed themselves as a result of Paxil induced suicide after it was prescribed to them by doctor's, pediatrics, child psychiatrists and, in general, healthcare professionals, whom used your journal as a reference when weighing up their decisions to prescribe it to this vulnerable population.
Yours sincerely,
Bob Fiddaman.
[1] Jureidini, Jon N. and McHenry, Leemon B.(2011) 'Conflicted Medical Journals and the Failure of Trust', Accountability in Research, 18: 1, 45 — 54
[2] Department of Justice - GLAXOSMITHKLINE SETTLEMENT FACT SHEET - http://www.justice.gov/usao/ma/news/GlaxoSmithKline/Settlement_Fact_Sheet.pdf
Fid
ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK HERE
AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE
No comments: