<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Chronology of Prasugrel Controversy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cardiobrief.org/2009/02/23/chronology-of-prasugrel-controversy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cardiobrief.org/2009/02/23/chronology-of-prasugrel-controversy/</link>
	<description>One-stop source for cardiology news and links</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 04:30:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lilly reports modest sales figures for Effient (prasugrel) &#171; CardioBrief</title>
		<link>http://cardiobrief.org/2009/02/23/chronology-of-prasugrel-controversy/#comment-2709</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lilly reports modest sales figures for Effient (prasugrel) &#171; CardioBrief]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:33:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cardiobrief.org/?p=637#comment-2709</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Click here for a complete chronology of the prasugrel controversy. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Click here for a complete chronology of the prasugrel controversy. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Medco launches 14,000 patient head-to-head observational comparison of clopidogrel and prasugrel &#171; CardioBrief</title>
		<link>http://cardiobrief.org/2009/02/23/chronology-of-prasugrel-controversy/#comment-2191</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Medco launches 14,000 patient head-to-head observational comparison of clopidogrel and prasugrel &#171; CardioBrief]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:17:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cardiobrief.org/?p=637#comment-2191</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Click here for a complete chronology of the prasugrel controversy. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Click here for a complete chronology of the prasugrel controversy. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FDA posts full drug approval package for prasugrel &#171; CardioBrief</title>
		<link>http://cardiobrief.org/2009/02/23/chronology-of-prasugrel-controversy/#comment-2061</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[FDA posts full drug approval package for prasugrel &#171; CardioBrief]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:35:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cardiobrief.org/?p=637#comment-2061</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Click here for a complete chronology of the prasugrel controversy. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Click here for a complete chronology of the prasugrel controversy. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Editor insists prasugrel ghostwriter go public &#171; CardioBrief</title>
		<link>http://cardiobrief.org/2009/02/23/chronology-of-prasugrel-controversy/#comment-1901</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Editor insists prasugrel ghostwriter go public &#171; CardioBrief]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 16:27:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cardiobrief.org/?p=637#comment-1901</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] You can also read our prasugrel chronology. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] You can also read our prasugrel chronology. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FDA official reviews his own prasugrel review in NEJM &#171; CardioBrief</title>
		<link>http://cardiobrief.org/2009/02/23/chronology-of-prasugrel-controversy/#comment-1870</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[FDA official reviews his own prasugrel review in NEJM &#171; CardioBrief]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2009 21:02:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cardiobrief.org/?p=637#comment-1870</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Click here for a complete chronology of the prasugrel controversy. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Click here for a complete chronology of the prasugrel controversy. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FDA official on prasugrel approval: &#8220;This has not been a well managed review process.&#8221; &#171; CardioBrief</title>
		<link>http://cardiobrief.org/2009/02/23/chronology-of-prasugrel-controversy/#comment-1830</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[FDA official on prasugrel approval: &#8220;This has not been a well managed review process.&#8221; &#171; CardioBrief]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 18:34:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cardiobrief.org/?p=637#comment-1830</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Chronology of Prasugrel Controversy [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Chronology of Prasugrel Controversy [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FDA approves prasugrel! &#171; CardioBrief</title>
		<link>http://cardiobrief.org/2009/02/23/chronology-of-prasugrel-controversy/#comment-1510</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[FDA approves prasugrel! &#171; CardioBrief]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 20:24:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cardiobrief.org/?p=637#comment-1510</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Chronology of Prasugrel Controversy [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Chronology of Prasugrel Controversy [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FDA official defends integrity of prasugrel review &#171; CardioBrief</title>
		<link>http://cardiobrief.org/2009/02/23/chronology-of-prasugrel-controversy/#comment-1453</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[FDA official defends integrity of prasugrel review &#171; CardioBrief]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:35:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cardiobrief.org/?p=637#comment-1453</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Chronology of Prasugrel Controversy [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Chronology of Prasugrel Controversy [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: What do FDA insiders really think of prasugrel? &#171; CardioBrief</title>
		<link>http://cardiobrief.org/2009/02/23/chronology-of-prasugrel-controversy/#comment-1424</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[What do FDA insiders really think of prasugrel? &#171; CardioBrief]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:23:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cardiobrief.org/?p=637#comment-1424</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] What do FDA insiders really think of&#160;prasugrel?  Posted on June 12, 2009 by Larry Husten   The benefits of prasugrel in TRITON-TIMI 38 were greatly exaggerated by the &#8220;massive inclusion of &#8216;MIs&#8221; unreported by the trial investigators,&#8221; according to an editorial in Cardiology by Victor Serebruany. Serebruany&#8217;s severe criticism of prasugrel and TRITON will come as no surprise to CardioBrief readers. (See our prasugrel chronology for a detailed history of the controversy). [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] What do FDA insiders really think of&nbsp;prasugrel?  Posted on June 12, 2009 by Larry Husten   The benefits of prasugrel in TRITON-TIMI 38 were greatly exaggerated by the &#8220;massive inclusion of &#8216;MIs&#8221; unreported by the trial investigators,&#8221; according to an editorial in Cardiology by Victor Serebruany. Serebruany&#8217;s severe criticism of prasugrel and TRITON will come as no surprise to CardioBrief readers. (See our prasugrel chronology for a detailed history of the controversy). [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: UK&#8217;s NICE favors restricted approval for prasugrel &#171; CardioBrief</title>
		<link>http://cardiobrief.org/2009/02/23/chronology-of-prasugrel-controversy/#comment-1415</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[UK&#8217;s NICE favors restricted approval for prasugrel &#171; CardioBrief]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 14:14:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cardiobrief.org/?p=637#comment-1415</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Here is a CardioBrief chronology of the prasugrel controversy. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Here is a CardioBrief chronology of the prasugrel controversy. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

