Abstract
The following arguments were made in favor of the drug application as presented to the Registration Committee.
-
1.
The Belloni Study of 1860 patients studied a wide range of patients which reflected the actual setting of use. Even though moderate, there was some effect in most patients, and no adverse reactions were observed.
-
2.
With respect to other studies, the drug has been shown in the animal and clinical trials to have a wide variety of effects, including an anti-anxiety effect, anti-convulsive effect, and a possible anti-hypertensive and anticholesterolemic effect, as well as a possible use for alcohol withdrawal. No toxicity is seen in high doses as indicated by the anti-convulsant study and post-marketing surveillance in one country has shown no serious adverse effects. Placebo controls were not carried out in any of the studies because in most cases this was felt to be unethical.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1981 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jones, J.K. (1981). Bad Drug Applications: “Katastrophex” Critique. In: Wardell, W.M., Velo, G. (eds) Drug Development, Regulatory Assessment, and Postmarketing Surveillance. NATO Advanced Study Institutes Series, vol 39. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-4055-3_33
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-4055-3_33
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4684-4057-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-4684-4055-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive