Sherry S
Department of Medicine, Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19140.
J Clin Pharmacol. 1987 Oct;27(10):730-4. doi: 10.1002/j.1552-4604.1987.tb02988.x.
Considerable dissatisfaction has been expressed over the FDA's Cardio-renal Advisory Panel's recommendation on May 29, 1987 that approval of rt-PA as a thrombolytic agent for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction be delayed. Justification for the Advisory Panel's action appears to be based on a lack of adequate data supporting the clinical benefit and safety of a specific therapeutic regimen of rt-PA, i.e., its molecular form, dosage, and duration of therapy. Although not an issue in the Panel's decision, questions can be raised concerning claims that rt-PA, in comparison to streptokinase, is a safer agent as far as bleeding complications are concerned, and is twice as effective in dissolving coronary thrombi during a period of potential clinical benefit. Also to be considered is the association of its use with a higher incidence of rethrombosis and a much greater cost.