# \[e-drug\] Banning metamisole in Moldova (5)

**URL:** <https://talk.edrugplus.org/t/e-drug-banning-metamisole-in-moldova-5/13419>\
**Category:** e-drug\
**Created:** [January 17, 2002, 7:54pm UTC](https://talk.edrugplus.org/t/e-drug-banning-metamisole-in-moldova-5/13419 "2002-01-17T19:54:58Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Vladimir\_S\_Shoukhov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/e19b73/32.png) [@Vladimir\_S\_Shoukhov](https://talk.edrugplus.org/u/Vladimir_S_Shoukhov)\
**Post date:** [January 17, 2002, 7:54pm UTC](https://talk.edrugplus.org/t/e-drug-banning-metamisole-in-moldova-5/13419/1 "2002-01-17T19:54:58Z")

</div>

E-drug: Banning metamisole in Moldova (5)  
------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Natalia,  
This is a remark from Dr.Herxheimer, had been sent more then a two years  
ago. But it is still relevant to this question.

Prof. Vladimir S. Shoukhov, M.D., D.Sci (Med)  
+7 (095) 930 4105  
shoukhov@yahoo.com

April 1999  
The following question and answer will interest e-druggers.

Andrew Herxheimer  
Andrew\_Herxheimer@compuserve.com

DIPYRONE (METAMIZOL): RESTORED TO GOOD REPUTE ?

translated from:  
P.S. Schonhofer: Internistische Praxis 1999; 39: 184-185

Question:  
Dipyrone (NOVALGIN etc.) has been re-licensed without restrictions  
in Sweden. What implications does this have in Germany?

Answer:

1. The licensed indications for dipyrone in Germany have not  
changed since 1986. There is no recent new scientific evidence  
affecting the state of knowledge. The licensed indications are:  
a) acute severe pain due to trauma or surgery,  
b) colic pain,  
c) cancer pain or other severe acute or chronic pain, but only if  
other therapeutic interventions have failed or are contra-indicated,  
d) severe hyperpyrexia, when other measures have failed.

Therefore, dipyrone is not licensed for pain such as migraine  
headache, since other non-opioid analgesics (acetylsalicylic acid,  
paracetamol or naproxen) are equally effective and other drugs are  
even superior, such as sumatriptan or ergotamine. Dipyrone is also  
not to be considered a substitute for acetylsalicylic acid,  
paracetamol or diclofenac in the WHO-guideline for control of pain,  
since it poses a higher risk to the patient than the other drugs at  
equieffective doses.

The regulations of the German drug law are not invalidated by  
claims of 'therapeutic freedom' made by the medical profession.  
The attending physician who has used dipyrone outside the  
approved indications is legally liable in cases of suspected drug-  
induced damage. The onus is on the physician, not the patient, to  
prove that the therapeutic choice was appropriate. This is difficult to  
achieve, especially since few data appear to exist to show that  
dipyrone is more effective or safer than other non-opioid analgesics.

2. The producer of dipyrone and some scientific advisers have  
repeatedly stated that the risk of developing agranulocytosis due to  
dipyrone is as low as 1:1 million. This is misleading and false. The  
results from the IAAAS (International Agranulocytosis and Aplastic  
Anemia Study) (5) give as dimension of the denominator "1 week of  
use", while the incidence of agranulocytosis is usually given as  
cases per year. So one has to multiply the incidence of dipyrone-  
induced agranulocytosis in the IAAAS (1:1 million) by 52 (weeks) in  
order to obtain the correct units (year). This gives the figure of 1  
case of agranulocytosis in 20,000 users of dipyrone per year  
(1:20,000), a realistic value.

In 1985 the IAAAS documented about 100 cases of dipyrone-  
Induced agranulocytosis in the Federal Republic of Germany. The  
use of dipyrone was close to 10 million packages prescribed for  
about 3 million patients in the same year. This gives 1 case of  
agranulocytosis in 30,000 users (1:30,000). This value is in  
agreement with data calculated from the international literature by  
the Federal Health Office in 1982 (1). Both calculations show that  
the risk of dipyrone-induced agranulocytosis is in fact about 50-fold  
higher than the "weekly" risk dimension of 1: 1 million described by  
the IAAAS (5) and widely propagated by the producer.

3. Dipyrone is a highly immunogenic compound. It not only causes  
allergic reactions in the bone marrow but also the whole spectrum of  
severe immunogenic diseases including interstitial nephritis,  
hepatitis, alveolitis, and pneumonitis as well as severe skin  
diseases such as Lyell or Stevens-Johnson syndrome (2). Dipyrone  
often causes vasculitis which clinically presents as shock-syndrome  
of acute or delayed onset. Data from our hospital-based adverse  
drug reactions monitoring system suggest that dipyrone-induced  
shock reactions of the vasculitis type occur about 10 times more  
often than agranulocytosis. The mortality of this reaction appears to  
be about 30-50 % in our patients: both substitution of volume and  
vasoconstrictor measures fail to raise blood pressure due to the  
destruction of the vascular endothelial cells by the dipyrone-induced  
hypersensitivity vasculitis.

This dimension of the risks induced by dipyrone is neither published  
nor discussed by producers or users (4), even though information is  
available on the high risks for many immunogenic diseases in  
addition to agranulocytosis (2).

4. It cannot be argued that dipyrone was re-licensed in Sweden,  
since the Swedish authorities wanted to revise a false evaluation of  
the risks of the drug in 1973 (3). The clinician who described the  
special risk of agranulocytosis by dipyrone in Sweden is no longer  
professionally active. On the other hand, the head of the  
department of drug safety in the Swedish drug agency appears to  
be close to the interests of the main dipyrone producer Hoechst  
which can be inferred from his participation in the IAAAS.

It appears strange that a responsible official of a drug regulatory  
office is allowed to participate in projects sponsored by the  
pharmaceutical industry and to profit in his scientific career from  
such support. Suspected similar activities caused the resignation  
even of the president of the German Federal Health Office (BGA) in  
the mid-eighties.

References:  
1. Anonymous. Dipyrone Hearing of the German Drug Authority.  
Lancet 1986;II: 737.  
2. A.T.I. Arzneimittelinformation: Vom Verdacht zur Diagnose,  
2. Aufl., S. 5-14. Berlin 1998.  
3. Boettiger LE, Westerholm B. Drug-induced blood dyscrasia in  
Sweden. Br.med. J. 1973;III:339-343.  
4. Gericke D. Editorial: Eindrucksvolles Comeback.  
Munch.med.Wschr. 1997; 139:110.  
5. Kaufmann DW et al. The Drug Epidemiology of Agranulocytosis  
and Aplastic Anemia. Monographs in Epidemiology and Statistics,  
Vol.18. Oxford University Press 1991.

Prof Dr. P.S. Schonhofer  
Institute of Clinical Pharmacology  
ZKH Sankt-Jorgen-Strasse  
D-28205 Bremen, GERMANY  
e-mail: klin.pharm@zkhstjuergen.bremen.de

--  
To send a message to E-Drug, write to: e-drug@usa.healthnet.org  
To subscribe or unsubscribe, write to: majordomo@usa.healthnet.org  
in the body of the message type: subscribe e-drug OR unsubscribe e-drug  
To contact a person, send a message to: owner-e-drug@usa.healthnet.org  
Information and archives: [http://www.healthnet.org/programs/edrug.html](http://www.healthnet.org/programs/edrug.html)
