<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Genentech Warns Of Liver Damage From Tarceva</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/09/genentech-warns-of-liver-damage-from-tarceva/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/09/genentech-warns-of-liver-damage-from-tarceva/</link>
	<description>News, Comment and Conversation</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:30:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: AHMAD KHALIL</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/09/genentech-warns-of-liver-damage-from-tarceva/#comment-499619</link>
		<dc:creator>AHMAD KHALIL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 May 2010 16:58:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=15875#comment-499619</guid>
		<description>CAN WE USE TARCEVA IN LIVER CIRRHOSIS WITH COMPENSATED  LIVER FUNCTION TESTS?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>CAN WE USE TARCEVA IN LIVER CIRRHOSIS WITH COMPENSATED  LIVER FUNCTION TESTS?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Salmon</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/09/genentech-warns-of-liver-damage-from-tarceva/#comment-375568</link>
		<dc:creator>Salmon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2008 11:58:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=15875#comment-375568</guid>
		<description>Moving things up from precautions to warnings to highlight a danger may have worked in the past but this is no longer an option.

Under the new Physicians Labeling Rule that is supposed to make labeling clearer, the warnings and precautions have been combined into a single section so it's actually harder to see what is more significant. Even if it's in the old labeling format it's supposed to be switched over.

I also have to question why FDA would put hepatotoxicity and death in precautions in the first place. A precaution is something you should look for ahead of time (e.g. first dose hypotension) and is not so serious.

I believe this highlights some of the subtle ways in which FDA is helping Pharma hid safety info even when it is available.

Congress needs to specify clear criteria for various levels of safety information.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Moving things up from precautions to warnings to highlight a danger may have worked in the past but this is no longer an option.</p>
<p>Under the new Physicians Labeling Rule that is supposed to make labeling clearer, the warnings and precautions have been combined into a single section so it&#8217;s actually harder to see what is more significant. Even if it&#8217;s in the old labeling format it&#8217;s supposed to be switched over.</p>
<p>I also have to question why FDA would put hepatotoxicity and death in precautions in the first place. A precaution is something you should look for ahead of time (e.g. first dose hypotension) and is not so serious.</p>
<p>I believe this highlights some of the subtle ways in which FDA is helping Pharma hid safety info even when it is available.</p>
<p>Congress needs to specify clear criteria for various levels of safety information.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.163 seconds -->

