New independent review of oseltamivir challenges its effectiveness.

The New York Times (1/18, Pollack) "Prescriptions" blog reports, "A new review of medical evidence continues to raise questions about the safety and effectiveness of the influenza drug Tamiflu [oseltamivir], which the United States and other nations have spent billions of dollars to stockpile for use in a possible flu pandemic." The review found "that Tamiflu could reduce the duration of flu symptoms by about 21 hours, from the typical six or seven days." However, "the reviewers said they could not confirm two other purported effects of the drug often cited as reasons for using it in a pandemic – that it reduced complications of flu, like pneumonia or hospitalizations, and that it reduced transmission of the virus."

        "Tamiflu antiviral treatment may not be as safe and effective as" claimed by Swiss drugmaker Roche AG, according to" researchers at the non-profit Cochrane Collaboration "who asked the company to publish data withheld from public review," Bloomberg News (1/18, Kresge) adds. "Though stockpiled to prevent the spread of flu, the drug hasn't been proven effective for that purpose, the British Medical Journal said in an article published with the Cochrane report." The independent review "cited a 'gap between evidence and policy,' saying the official pandemic-response plans in the US and UK are based in part on research that hadn't been published."

        MedPage Today (1/18, Smith) points out that the Cochrane Collaboration researchers "pored over 15 published studies and nearly 30,000 pages of 'clinical study reports.'" However, according to the researchers, "the clinical study information – data previously shared only with regulators – was only a part of what internal evidence suggested was available." What's more, "many published studies had to be excluded because of missing or contradictory data, Jefferson and colleagues reported."