Joint replacements are the #1 expenditure of Medicare. The process of approving these medical devices is flawed according to the Institute of Medicine. It is time for patients' voices to be heard as stakeholders and for public support for increased medical device industry accountability and heightened protections for patients. Post-market registry. Product warranty. Patient/consumer stakeholder equity. Rescind industry pre-emptions/entitlements. All clinical trials must report all data.
Please share what you have learned!
Twitter: @JjrkCh
Showing posts with label Margaret Hamburg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Margaret Hamburg. Show all posts

Saturday, September 17, 2016

Toxic Levaquin, FDA failure, Guns and the 2016 Election

Campaign 2016: Toxic side effects

by Dan Walter
Forget about guns… according to a long-time nemesis and drug safety activists, chances are that the Secret Service should be protecting Hillary Clinton from her doctor.
Among those who panicked at the recent sight of Hillary Clinton being physically helped toward the finish line in this election, supporters in the patient safety community suffered an extra jolt with the news that Clinton is being administered the antibiotic Levaquin to treat her pneumonia. The widely prescribed drug, along with other drugs like Cipro in the class known as fluoroquinolones, has been associated with an outsized risk of particularly nasty side effects — and should Hillary find herself among the minority of those who are injured by the drug, one of her main antagonists says the Democratic nominee for president may have herself partly to blame.
The Food and Drug Administration sent out an advisory in May of this year telling physicians what a lot of people already know about the class of drugs called fluoroquinolones: They can they be very dangerous. The problem seems to be that many doctors may not have gotten the memo.
“In my experience,” says patient safety advocate Linda Radach, “it is not uncommon for physicians to not know what the FDA has said or done. The chances are very high that Clinton’s physician has no idea that the FDA has posted black box warnings for the broad spectrum antibiotic. In general, unless there is someone within the provider network assigned to keep watch for FDA urgent postings, most physicians remain clueless of these warnings.”
“No matter how important a doctor is or how trusted, they are never fully informed about everything,” says Kathy Day, a retired nurse and safety advocate from Maine.
That has been my experience as well. I consider my current doctor to be the best primary care physician I have ever been to, but when it came time to treat bronchitis, he prescribed a fluoroquinolone. When I told him about the many people injured by the drug, the survivor support groups, the lawsuitsand the FDA advisories, he was genuinely surprised. He has been prescribing the drugs with great efficacy and no serious side effects for many years. In light of current knowledge about how these drugs can have crippling side effects in a small percentage of patients, one can assume that the doctor and his patients have simply been fortunate, although another possibility is that any injuries were latent and were not perceived to have been the result of the antibiotic.
But the fact that this very skilled and otherwise knowledgeable physician was unaware of the risks illustrates the information overload problem confronting doctors.
Rachel Brummert was prescribed fluoroquinolone for a sinus infection in 2006, and today she endures the suffering from the many bad reactions which began shortly after she took it, including nine tendon ruptures, peripheral neuropathy, arrhythmia, tremors, vertigo, tinnitus, persistent gastric problems and more.
She is now Executive Director of the Quinolone Vigilance Foundation and works to raise awareness of Fluoroquinolone Toxicity — among doctors.
“Whether Hillary Clinton should be prescribed Levaquin is obviously a matter for her to discuss with her doctor,” Brummert says. “One would assume that it is entirely appropriate. But for me, the point is that not all doctors have the information they should be getting from the FDA.”
Brummert says that the FDA should have been sending out “Dear Doctor” letters to increase the chances of informing physicians that these very powerful and effective antibiotics should be wielded with care. She sees current news coverage as an opportunity. “This highlights a bigger problem that needs to be addressed,” she says. “And we are hopeful that Clinton’s being put on Levaquin will spark a national conversation about medication safety and the balance between risk vs benefit.
Brummert has been pushing for the FDA to send out “Dear Doctor” letters for many months. “While I know that not all doctors will read them and their time is valuable, it’s better than whatever system is not working right now,” she says.
In the face of the FDA’s inaction, Brummert has taken the task upon herself through her foundation and expects to begin sending letters out by the end of the month.
***
Meanwhile, professional Clinton nemesis Larry Klayman probably could not believe his astonishing good luck when he heard the news that Hillary was being treated with Levaquin. Klayman’s the man who keeps the Clinton email controversy fully stoked through Judicial Watch, his “non-partisan educational foundation,” and with the antibiotic story, he has hit the triple jackpot in his Javert-like quest to take Hillary down a peg or two, having recently filed an $800 million lawsuit on behalf of five Levaquin victims.
In conjunction with the suit against Johnson & Johnson, the purveyors of Levaquin, Klayman initiated a RICO lawsuit charging former FDA commissioner Margaret Hamburg and her husband, hedge fund executive Peter Brown, with “collusion, conspiracy and racketeering alongside the pharmaceutical giant, Johnson & Johnson to conceal those deadly risks — to protect their financial stake.”
And here’s the kicker: Klayman says Hamburg got her job at the FDA because she and her husband contributed heavily to Hillary’s campaign, and to the Clinton Foundation, and that they “gave political contributions and gratuities to President Obama to induce him to nominate her to be appointed as FDA Commissioner.” In short, the suit alleges, “Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg was nominated as a result of huge political and other gratuities to Hillary Clinton and The Clinton Foundation, and at Mrs. Clinton’s recommendation.”
The icing on the cake for Klayman is that one of the side effects of Levaquin plays right into Trumpian conspiracy theories regarding the health of the Democratic nominee. He plays the magnificent cards he’s been dealt expertly, as demonstrated by the headline for a recent press releaseproclaiming that “Hillary Clinton’s medical condition may be result of her taking dangerous drug Levaquin.”
Thus, Hillary’s everyday “medical condition” is transformed from pneumonia into one with far more profound political implications in Klayman’s release:
Under the heading “Central Nervous System Effects” on the Levaquin label, it states: “Fluoroquinolones, including Levaquin, have been associated with an increased risk of central nervous system (CNS) effects, including convulsions, toxic psychoses, increased intracranial pressure…. Fluoroquinolones may also cause… tremors, restlessness, anxiety, lightheadedness, confusion, hallucinations, paranoia, depression, nightmares, insomnia, and, rarely, suicidal thoughts or acts. These reactions may occur following the first dose….”
And now Fluoroquinolone toxicity has been added to the already poisonous brew of the 2016 presidential election.

Friday, November 30, 2012

Astroturf Lobby Group? Where is the Patient Engagement?


Greetings,

The Center for Devices and Radiological Health at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration would like to make you aware of an upcoming event. Next Monday the independent non-profit Medical Device Innovation Consortium (MDIC) will be announcing a new public-private partnership between the MDIC, FDA, other government agencies, non-profits, academia, and the medical device industry designed to address emerging device regulatory science issues.  Additional information on the MDIC can be found at http://www.deviceconsortium.org/

As key health technology stakeholders, we would be pleased for you to join us to hear the Commissioner discuss this important new initiative. The Consortium is designed to improve outcomes for patients by fostering innovation, increasing the tools available to evaluate new medical devices to make sure they are safe and effective, and to ensure these improvements in care get to patients as expeditiously as possibly while safeguarding public health.

Please join us if you can,

Michelle McMurry-Heath
Associate Director for Science, Acting Chief Scientist
Office of the Center Director
Center for Devices and Radiological Health
U.S. Food and Drug Administration


---------------------------------------------------------

You are invited to attend the Senate MedTech Caucus briefing:

Monday, December 3rd, 10:30 am – 12:00 pm
Room 106, Dirksen Senate Office Building
Announcing: “Medical Device Innovation Consortium”
Featuring: FDA Commissioner, Margaret Hamburg, M.D. & FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) Director, Jeffrey Shuren, M.D., J.D.

The program will include a briefing on the creation of the Medical Device Innovation Consortium (MDIC).
The MDIC is a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) whose mission is to improve health through the application of shared knowledge in medical device regulatory science.  It is the first-ever PPP created to focus exclusively on advancing medical device regulatory science.
The MDIC will create a collaborative environment where nationwide representatives from industry, non-profits, and FDA can work together to keep pace with the needs of patients in the United States.
Speakers will include:
Senator Amy Klobuchar
Senator Al Franken
FDA Commissioner, Margaret Hamburg, M.D.
FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) Director, Jeffrey Shuren, M.D., J.D.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Deputy Director, Coverage & Analysis Group, Tamara Syrek Jensen, J.D.
Immucor, Inc., CEO, William Hawkins
LifeScience Alley CEO, Dale Wahlstrom



http://www.deviceconsortium.org

The Medical Device Innovation Consortium is a public private partnership whose mission is to improve health through the application of shared knowledge in regulatory science.
Focused on the Medical Device Industry
The MDIC is the only public private partnership focused exclusively on the strategic needs of the medical device industry. The MDIC is designed to create a collaborative environment where the private sector can partner with the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health to solve technical issues that affect the industry.
Focused on Regulatory Science
Regulatory science refers to the development and evaluation of new tools, methods, standards and applied science that support a better understanding and improved evaluation of product safety, quality, effectiveness, and manufacturing throughout the product life cycle.
Focused on Improving Health
The MDIC has been formed to add value at the intersecting needs of the medical device industry, the FDA, and the related organizations that are together responsible for a vibrant medical device industry that serves the public health needs of the U.S.
Founding Members
FDA
Medtronic
Life Science Alley

About Us
The MDIC is the first ever Public Private Partnership (PPP) created with the sole objective of advancing medical device regulatory science. The intent is to be a national 501c(3) organization that operates in partnership with the FDA.
                The PPP relationship was formalized with the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between LifeScience Alley, Inc., a Minnesota trade association, and the FDA on December 7, 2011. In August 2012, Articles of Incorporation were filed to formally establish the MDIC.
                Membership and participation in the MDIC will be open to representatives of organizations that are substantially involved in medical and/or medical device research, development, treatment, or education; the promotion of public health; or who have expertise in regulatory science.
Governance Structure
The MDIC will be governed by a Board of Directors that will oversee the MDIC’s subcommittees and assist in identifying sources of funding. Subcommittees will represent industry sectors or technology areas (eg. Modeling, interoperability, orthopedics, neurological devices).
                Each subcommittee will be responsible for establishing working groups chartered with identifying key issues affecting their industry segment.
                The working groups will bring forward project plans for prioritization and funding allocation.
What We Do
Strategies
The MDIC will pursue several strategies in support of its mission:
1.            Create a forum for collaboration and dialogue, working within a flexible governance structure to encourage broad participation from the different industry stakeholders including FDA.
2.            Make strategic investments in regulatory science, utilizing working groups to identify and prioritize key issues and to request, evaluate, and implement project proposals that support the MDIC’s mission.
3.            Provide tools to drive cost effective innovation, emphasizing education and the development of new methods and approaches with well documented data and details to enable implementation.
Value
The activities and output from the MDIC will:
                Ensure innovative technology is readily available to U.S. patients
                Make the medical device regulatory process more expeditious, transparent and effective
                Reduce the risk and expense of clinical research
                Reduce the time and cost of medical device development
Projects
The MDIC will accept project proposals specifically focused on advancing medical device regulatory science.
After the initial meeting of the MDIC Board of Directors (early in CY13), the first sector subcommittees will be commissioned.
                The subcommittees will organize working groups to develop rigorous project plans for prioritized topics.
                Detailed project plans will be used to solicit project specific funding from companies who will benefit from their outcome and foundations interested in supporting the initiative.
The advantages of conducting research within the MDIC include:
                Involvement of the FDA at all stages of the work thereby building awareness of and support for specific product development tools and approaches.
                The ability to share best practices across industry and academia.
                Exposure to a range of perspectives representing multiple constituents which can ensure more robust project development and data interpretation.
                A mechanism for sharing the expense of research in the regulatory science, non-competitive domain.
TOP

Join
The core operations of the MDIC are funded through contributions from members.
                Pricing for annual membership is determined based upon the operating expenses for the MDIC.
                The goal is to keep the membership low enough to encourage broad, cross-industry participation while still meeting the operational needs of the organization.
                It is anticipated that as the membership base is increased, there is the potential that the dues per member will decrease.
Membership will be offered at several levels based on organization type and, if applicable, annual revenue. Project specific funding will be obtained from companies and foundations as a result of working group development of rigorous project plans.
                $150,000 contribution annually: Companies with annual revenue >$10 B
                $100,000 contribution annually: Companies with annual revenue between $5–10 B
                $50,000 contribution annually: Companies with annual revenue between $1–4.9 B
                $10,000 contribution annually: Companies with annual revenue <$1 B
                $5,000 contribution annually: Nonprofit Sector
Benefits of Membership
The MDIC will provide its members with:
                A mechanism through which to influence the future of the medical device industry by virtue of direct, collaborative discussions and projects with FDA.
                A process for identifying, documenting, prioritizing and removing issues affecting the industry.
                Processes, policies, support staff and pooled project funding to enable efficient regulatory science research in areas of strategic importance to the industry.
                Educational forums in which to learn about the evolving regulatory science process, new tools, standards and test methods.
                Searchable databases and links to relevant reports and methods.
                Regular updates on the status of the MDIC’s activities and opportunities for involvement.
TOP

Contact Us
To receive further information and to discuss next steps and membership details, please contact:
Maura Donovan, Ph.D.Interim Executive Director, MDIC763-505-4515maura.donovan@medtronic.com
or
Dale WahlstromCEO of LifeScience Alley952-542-3077dwahlstrom@biobusinessalliance.org
TOP

Press
Minnesota Device-Makers Join Forces with FDA to Advance Regulatory Science
Regulatory Intelligence | Posted: 8 December 2011
Minnesota-based medical device lobbying group, LifeScience Alley, signed a memorandum of understanding with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), making official a year-long partnership to continue developing best practices in regulatory science. Center for Devices & Radiological health chief Dr. Jeffrey Shuren signed the memorandum, formalizing more than a year of joint effort toward developing regulatory science — a set of tools and methods for evaluating the safety, effectiveness, quality and performance of medical devices. If the pilot version of the program works in Minnesota, it may serve as a national model for device safety and clearance. (Mass Device)
Join the discussion on Regulatory Exchange








http://www.massbio.org/news/181-sen_brown_co-chairs_medical_technology_caucus/news_detail

Sen. Brown co-chairs Medical Technology Caucus
April 4, 2011

WASHINGTON, DCU.S. Senators Scott Brown (R-MA) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) announced today that they will serve as co-chairs for the new Senate Medical Technology Caucus in the 112th Congress. The caucus aims to increase awareness about issues facing the medical technology sector, an industry that creates life-saving and life-enhancing innovations that improve patient care.
In Massachusetts, we have more than 200 medical device companies and hundreds of bio and pharma companies, all of which provide good-paying jobs to thousands of citizens,” Brown said. “It is critical that we provide a business environment for them to innovate, grow and thrive. I’m pleased to be the Republican chair of this bipartisan caucus, and look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to give our medical device and technology companies the tools and resources they need to continue their important work.”
“These businesses not only spark medical breakthroughs, they save lives,” Klobuchar said. “Every day in every state small medical technology companies are driving the innovation agenda we need to compete in a global economy. I will continue to work to make sure that Minnesota remains a leader in health care innovation by developing innovative products while maintaining patient safety.”

The United States is the world’s only net exporter of medical devices, with a $5.4-billion annual trade surplus. Minnesota is home to 400 medical device practices that support over 50,000 jobs in the state. The industry provides good-paying jobs to more than 400,000 Americans, with total direct and indirect employment exceeding two million.
Klobuchar has led the effort to cut red tape that threatens innovation in this industry. After a December report surveyed over 200 medical technology companies and found that confusing and contradictory regulations are stifling innovation, Klobuchar and Brown pushed the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to reform its slow and inconsistent 510(k) approval process for medical devices to maintain safety, protect patients, and encourage innovation. Klobuchar is the chair of the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Competitiveness, Innovation, and Export Promotion, and plans to hold a hearing to examine the medical device approval process and to examine ways to improve export options.