WHEN the US Congress examined the controversy over the diabetes drug Avandia back in June, things got embarrassing for GlaxoSmithKline. A researcher who raised safety concerns in 1999, although he later withdrew them, was questioned about attempts by the company to silence him 鈥� a charge GSK denied.
Now it has emerged that conversations about how to deal with the critic took place at the highest levels. Internal emails presented to the Senate this month show that several executives, including CEO Jean-Pierre Garnier, knew of plans to put pressure on John Buse, a diabetes researcher at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC).
One email, entitled 鈥淎vandia Renegade鈥�, was sent in June 1999 by William Claypool, a senior vice-president at what was then called SmithKline Beecham, to Tachi Yamada, then chairman of research and development. It accuses Buse of misrepresenting safety data.
Advertisement
Claypool suggests warning Buse not to repeat the claims, with the 鈥減unishment鈥� being that 鈥渨e would complain up his academic line鈥� and to the bodies that gave Buse accreditation for teaching.
Yamada鈥檚 reply, sent the same day, was copied to Garnier. In it, Yamada discusses the possibility of approaching the chairman of Buse鈥檚 department and of suing Buse for 鈥渒nowingly defaming our product鈥�. 鈥淭op officials at GlaxoSmithKline clearly knew what was going on,鈥� says Merrill Goozner of the Center for Science in the Public Interest in Washington DC.
Neither Yamada nor Claypool could be reached for comment. GSK spokeswoman Mary Anne Rhyne says the company did not attempt to silence Buse. 鈥淕SK was trying to correct a mistake Dr Buse made in his presentation,鈥� she says. 鈥淭hat was troubling to us and we wanted to make sure that our data was accurately presented. We considered internally a number of options, but ultimately we made our concerns known to Dr Buse and he corrected his statements.鈥�
Buse also declined to comment. He signed a statement in June stating that he had later changed his thinking on Avandia and that the incident had been 鈥渦psetting, but not life-altering鈥�.
