From: Utilisation trends of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone in Australia before and after safety warnings
Drug authorities | Time | Warnings | Adjusted for | Coefficienta |       95% CIb | pvalue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rosiglitazone: ARIMA (1,0,2) model | ||||||
EMA1_FDA1 | May 2007 | Ischemic heart | - | −15.04 | [−21.86, −8.22] | <0.001 c |
FDA2 | Aug 2007 | Label update heart related | EMA1_FDA1 | −2.61 | [−40.41, 35.20] | 0.893 |
EMA2 | Oct 2007 | Ischemic heart | EMA1_FDA1, FDA2 | 1.94 | [−95.49, 99.36] | 0.969 |
TGA1 | Dec 2007 | Ischemic heart | EMA1_FDA1, FDA2, EMA2 | −5.25 | [−38.01, 27.51] | 0.837 |
EMA3 | Jan 2008 | Ischemic heart | EMA1_FDA1, FDA2, EMA2, TGA1 | −0.39 | [−80.06, 79.28] | 0.992 |
FDA3, TGA2, EMA4 | Sep 2010 | EU suspended, | EMA1_FDA1, FDA2, EMA2, TGA1, EMA3 | 1.25 | [−8.99, 11.49] | 0.811 |
US restriction | ||||||
Pioglitazone: ARIMA (1,0,1) model | ||||||
FDA | June 2011 | Bladder cancer | - | −5.76 | [−13.91, 2.39] | 0.166 |
EMA, TGA | July 2011 | Bladder cancer | - | −6.57 | [−14.80, 1.65] | 0.117 |