Medicine

1090 readers

1 users here now

This is a community for medical professionals. Please see the Medical Community Hub for other communities.

Official Lemmy community for /r/Medicine.

[email protected] is a virtual lounge for physicians and other medical professionals from around the world to talk about the latest advances, controversies, ask questions of each other, have a laugh, or share a difficult moment.

This is a highly moderated community. Please read the rules carefully before posting or commenting.

Related Communities

Medical Community Hub
Medicine (📍)
Medicine Canada
Premed
Premed Canada
Public Health

See the pinned post in the Medical Community Hub for links and descriptions. link ([email protected])

Rules

Violations may result in a warning, removal, or ban based on moderator discretion. The rule numbers will correspond to those on /r/Medicine, and where differences are listed where relevant. Please also remember that instance rules for mander.xyz will also apply.

Flairs & Starter Comment: Lemmy does not have user flairs, but you are welcome to highlight your role in the healthcare system, however you feel is appropriate. Please also include a starter comment to explain why the link is of interest to the community and to start the conversation. Link posts without starter comments may be temporarily or permanently removed. (rule is different from /r/Medicine)
No requests for professional advice or general medical information: You may not solicit medical advice or share personal health anecdotes about yourself, family, acquaintances, or celebrities, seek comments on care provided by other clinicians, discuss billing disputes, or otherwise seek a professional opinion from members of the community. General queries about medical conditions, prognosis, drugs, or other medical topics from the lay public are not allowed.
No promotions, advertisements, surveys, or petitions: Surveys (formal or informal) and polls are not allowed on this community. You may not use the community to promote your website, channel, community, or product. Market research is not allowed. Petitions are not allowed. Advertising or spam may result in a permanent ban. Prior permission is required before posting educational material you were involved in making.
Link to high-quality, original research whenever possible: Posts which rely on or reference scientific data (e.g. an announcement about a medical breakthrough) should link to the original research in peer-reviewed medical journals or respectable news sources as judged by the moderators. Avoid login or paywall requirements when possible. Please submit direct links to PDFs as text/self posts with the link in the text. Sensationalized titles, misrepresentation of results, or promotion of blatantly bad science may lead to removal.
Act professionally and decently: /c/medicine is a public forum that represents the medical community and comments should reflect this. Please keep disagreement civil and focused on issues. Trolling, abuse, and insults (either personal or aimed at a specific group) are not allowed. Do not attack other users' flair. Keep offensive language to a minimum and do not use ethnic, sexual, or other slurs. Posts, comments, or private messages violating Reddit's content policy will be removed and reported to site administration.
No personal agendas: Users who primarily post or comment on a single pet issue on this community (as judged by moderators) will be asked to broaden participation or leave. Comments from users who appear on this community only to discuss a specific political topic, medical condition, health care role, or similar single-topic issues will be removed. Comments which deviate from the topic of a thread to interject an unrelated personal opinion (e.g. politics) or steer the conversation to their pet issue will be removed.
Protect patient confidentiality: Posting protected health information may result in an immediate ban. Please anonymize cases and remove any patient-identifiable information. For health information arising from the United States, follow the HIPAA Privacy Rule's De-Identification Standard.
No careers or homework questions: Questions relating to medical school admissions, courses or exams should be asked elsewhere. Links to medical training communitys and a compilation of careers and specialty threads are available on the /r/medicine wiki. Medical career advice may be asked. (rule is different from /r/Medicine)
Throwaway accounts: There are currently no limits on account age or 'karma'. (rule is different from /r/Medicine)
No memes or low-effort posts: Memes, image links (including social media screenshots), images of text, or other low-effort posts or comments are not allowed. Videos require a text post or starter comment that summarizes the video and provides context.
No Covid misinformation, conspiracy theories, or other nonsense

Moderators may act with their judgement beyond the scope of these rules to maintain the quality of the community. If your post doesn't show up shortly after posting, make sure that it meets our posting criteria. If it does, please message a moderator with a link to your post and explanation. You are free to message the moderation team for a second opinion on moderator actions.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

[Opinion Piece] New Alzheimer’s drug is a problem for FDA’s pass-fail approach (www.washingtonpost.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

2 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This is an op-ed written by Jerry Avorn. His bio from WaPo:

Jerry Avorn is a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and co-director of the Program on Regulation, Therapeutics and Law (PORTAL) at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.

The author argues that the accelerated approval process within the FDA has led to drugs reaching the market that fail to show efficacy when administered more widely. They write:

For these medicines, the FDA has granted “accelerated approval” based not on patients’ clinical improvement but merely on small changes in lab tests. After accelerated approval, drugmakers are asked to do follow-up studies to prove that their drugs actually help patients. But the government may allow many years to complete such studies, and they are often started late or done poorly, my research group has found.

As an example of the accelerated approval process gone wrong the author points to Makena:

In 2011, a medication meant to prevent premature birth, Makena, was approved on an accelerated basis, but then was never clearly shown to work. Getting it off the market took until this past April.

The author proposes a middle-ground between the pass/fail status that the FDA gives medicines currently:

The FDA’s simple all-or-none decision framework is a poor fit for this evolving scientific reality. The agency should instead create a new status for some drugs that is neither full approval nor outright rejection — a conditional approval that would allow a new drug with ambiguous credentials to be used only in a limited way until better evidence is collected.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In my professional life, I have worked on a number of clinical phase therapeutics and authored sections of regulatory filings submitted to agencies like the FDA and EMA. Several of those assets were classified as orphan drugs and were granted accelerated approval. I think that the accelerated approval process fulfills a role that is needed in cases where there is an unmet medical need. Additionally, some indications lend themselves to proven proxy measures for efficacy that give a high level of confidence in clinical use. However, the accelerated approval process as it is currently used is prone to abuse in that the FDA is not able or willing (not sure which) to enforce post-approval actions on drugmakers in a timely fashion.

The author's example of Makena shows that over a decade can pass without showing medical efficacy in follow-up trials before marketing authorization is pulled. The author doesn't go into detail, merely linked to it, but the conditional approval granted by the EMA is much more fit for purpose. Under that process, the conditional approval is just granted for one year and must be renewed each year. I have not worked on this renewal process personally, but from experience interacting with the agencies before, they would be looking for material progress towards meeting any stated post-approval obligations. This process gives the EMA an annual chance to pull a product if there is ambiguous or no demonstrated clinical effect or if the adverse events are more severe or common than anticipated.

As an aside, I found it interesting that the impending Leqembi (lecanemab) accelerated approval is what inspired this article. Leqembi's predecessor, Aduhelm (aducanumab), was granted accelerated approval, but was so poorly received by the market/hcp's/insurance companies, that it might as well have not been approved at all.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Totally agree. It's so tough to be on the clinical side too, and have drugs with really marginal data get approved and then have to counsel patients and families on them. FDA needs to enforce the companies actually gathering definitive efficacy data in a timely manner if they want to stay on the market. Especially at the eye watering prices they are often charging for new therapeutics that often have no good relation to the value they're actually supposedly bringing.