Brunton · Current medical research and opinion 2007 · narrative review · n=?

Differentiating prescription omega-3-acid ethyl esters (P-OM3) from dietary-supplement omega-3 fatty acids.

Cited 33 times in the scientific literature.

Level 5 - mechanism / opinion, no new human data

Narrative review of literature and regulatory status without systematic review methodology or new human data

PubMed 17519081 · doi:10.1185/030079907x188017 · record verified 2026-08-30

What was done

The authors conducted a review searching PubMed and the FDA website (1995–2007) for articles covering fish oil, EPA, DHA, and omega-3 formulations. They evaluated differences in sources, recommended intakes, regulatory standards, and clinical properties between dietary-supplement omega-3 fatty acids and prescription omega-3-acid ethyl esters (P-OM3).

What was found

The abstract reports no numerical clinical trial data or statistical comparisons. It notes that P-OM3 (Omacor) is the only FDA-approved omega-3 product in the US indicated as an adjunct to diet to lower very high triglyceride levels (≥ 500 mg/dL) in adults, whereas nonprescription dietary supplements are not subject to pharmaceutical regulatory standards for safety, quality, and efficacy.

Why it matters

The review clarifies the distinction between unregulated over-the-counter fish oil supplements and FDA-approved prescription omega-3 formulations for severe hypertriglyceridemia.

Limits

This is a narrative review without meta-analysis or formal quality assessment. The authors explicitly note a lack of head-to-head clinical trials comparing prescription omega-3 formulations with dietary supplements. The abstract does not report the total number of included studies.

Cited by