Editing Celecoxib (section)

===Fabricated efficacy studies===
[[Pfizer]] and its partner, [[Pharmacia]] presented findings from their study that Celebrex was "better in protecting the stomach from serious complications than other drugs."<ref name=NYT2012 /> This became Celebrex's main selling point. However, following federal investigations it was revealed that Pfizer and Pharmacia "only presented the results from the first six months of a year-long study rather than the whole thing." These partial results were then published in [[The Journal of the American Medical Association]].<ref name=NYT2012 /> In 2001, the US [[Food and Drug Administration]] (FDA) released the full results of the Pfizer and Pharmacia study which showed that they had withheld crucial data.<ref name=NYT2012 /> By 2012, a federal judge unsealed "thousands of pages of internal documents and depositions" in a "long-running securities fraud case against Pfizer."<ref name=NYT2012 />

In March 2009, [[Scott S. Reuben]], former chief of acute pain at [[Baystate Medical Center]], Springfield, Massachusetts, revealed that the data for 21 studies he had authored for the efficacy of the drug (along with others such as [[Vioxx]]) had been fabricated. The analgesic effects of the drugs had been exaggerated. Reuben was also a former paid spokesperson for Pfizer. Although from 2002 to 2007 Pfizer underwrote much of Dr. Reuben's research and "many of his trials found that Celebrex and Lyrica, Pfizer drugs, were effective against postoperative pain," Pfizer was not aware of the fraudulent data.<ref name="nyt0311">{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/11/health/research/11pain.html |title=Doctor Admits Pain Studies Were Frauds, Hospital Says |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=11 March 2009 |access-date=27 December 2015 | vauthors = Harris G |archive-date=17 May 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170517184147/http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/11/health/research/11pain.html |url-status=live }}</ref>{{Failed verification|date=August 2018}} None of the retracted studies were submitted to either the US [[Food and Drug Administration]] or the European Union's regulatory agencies before the drug's approval. Although Pfizer issued a public statement declaring, "It is very disappointing to learn about Dr. Scott Reuben's alleged actions. When we decided to support Dr. Reuben's research, he worked for a credible academic medical center and appeared to be a reputable investigator",<ref name="WSJ-3-2009">{{cite news | url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123672510903888207 | work=[[The Wall Street Journal]] | title=Top Pain Scientist Fabricated Data in Studies, Hospital Says | vauthors = Winstein KJ | date=11 March 2009 | url-access=subscription | access-date=3 August 2017 | archive-date=30 August 2017 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170830223401/https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123672510903888207 | url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Associated Press, Mar 11, 2009, ''Mass. doctor accused of faking pain pill data'' |url=https://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jjpBsTFN9SEtQu-xyDltivC2GJ8AD96S2KVO0 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090316103119/https://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jjpBsTFN9SEtQu-xyDltivC2GJ8AD96S2KVO0 |archive-date=16 March 2009 }}</ref> the documents unsealed in 2012, revealed that by February 2000, Pharmacia employees had devised a strategy to present the findings.<ref name=NYT2012 />