Monday, January 28, 2013
FDA Panel Approves Imatinib for Pediatric ALL....
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today approved imatinib (Gleevec,
Novartis) for the treatment of newly diagnosed pediatric acute
lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) that is Philadelphia chromosome (Ph)
positive.
"We are pleased that the number of cancer medications for children is on the rise," said Richard Pazdur, MD, director of the Office of Hematology and Oncology Products at the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, in a press statement.
In 2011, imatinib was approved to treat children newly diagnosed with Ph-positive chronic myeloid leukemia (CML).
However, ALL is the most common type of pediatric cancer, affecting approximately 2900 children annually, according to the FDA.
The safety and effectiveness of imatinib for pediatric patients with Ph-positive ALL were established in a clinical trial that enrolled children (1 year and older) and young adults with very-high-risk ALL (>45% chance of experiencing complications from their disease within 5 years of treatment).
The 92 patients with Ph-positive ALL enrolled in the trial were divided into 5 treatment groups, with each successive group receiving imatinib plus chemotherapy for a longer period.
Fifty of the Ph-positive ALL patients received imatinib for the longest period, and 70% of these patients did not experience relapse or death within 4 years. In addition, patient deaths decreased with the increasing duration of imatinib treatment in combination with chemotherapy, according to the FDA.
The most common adverse effects observed in children with Ph-positive ALL treated with imatinib plus chemotherapy were decreased neutrophil levels, decreased blood platelets levels, liver toxicity, and infection.
Imatinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that blocks cancer-promoting proteins, and should be used in combination with chemotherapy to treat pediatric Ph-positive ALL.
Imatinib has been a practice-changing drug in this setting,
according to the Children's Oncology Group, which conducted the pivotal
clinical trial.
According to the group's Web site, the preferred treatment for Ph-positive ALL before imatinib was stem cell transplantation followed by 3 to 6 months of chemotherapy. However, cure rates were less than 50% with this approach. Imatinib in combination with chemotherapy has doubled cure rates, and stem cell transplantation is no longer automatically considered to be the best way to treat children with Ph-positive ALL.
Imatinib was granted accelerated approval in 2001 by the FDA to treat patients with blast-crisis, accelerated-phase, or chronic-phase Ph-positive CML who have failed interferon-alpha therapy. The drug was also approved in 2012 for the treatment of adults whose Kit (CD117)-positive gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) had been surgically removed.
"We are pleased that the number of cancer medications for children is on the rise," said Richard Pazdur, MD, director of the Office of Hematology and Oncology Products at the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, in a press statement.
In 2011, imatinib was approved to treat children newly diagnosed with Ph-positive chronic myeloid leukemia (CML).
However, ALL is the most common type of pediatric cancer, affecting approximately 2900 children annually, according to the FDA.
The safety and effectiveness of imatinib for pediatric patients with Ph-positive ALL were established in a clinical trial that enrolled children (1 year and older) and young adults with very-high-risk ALL (>45% chance of experiencing complications from their disease within 5 years of treatment).
The 92 patients with Ph-positive ALL enrolled in the trial were divided into 5 treatment groups, with each successive group receiving imatinib plus chemotherapy for a longer period.
Fifty of the Ph-positive ALL patients received imatinib for the longest period, and 70% of these patients did not experience relapse or death within 4 years. In addition, patient deaths decreased with the increasing duration of imatinib treatment in combination with chemotherapy, according to the FDA.
The most common adverse effects observed in children with Ph-positive ALL treated with imatinib plus chemotherapy were decreased neutrophil levels, decreased blood platelets levels, liver toxicity, and infection.
Imatinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that blocks cancer-promoting proteins, and should be used in combination with chemotherapy to treat pediatric Ph-positive ALL.
According to the group's Web site, the preferred treatment for Ph-positive ALL before imatinib was stem cell transplantation followed by 3 to 6 months of chemotherapy. However, cure rates were less than 50% with this approach. Imatinib in combination with chemotherapy has doubled cure rates, and stem cell transplantation is no longer automatically considered to be the best way to treat children with Ph-positive ALL.
Imatinib was granted accelerated approval in 2001 by the FDA to treat patients with blast-crisis, accelerated-phase, or chronic-phase Ph-positive CML who have failed interferon-alpha therapy. The drug was also approved in 2012 for the treatment of adults whose Kit (CD117)-positive gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) had been surgically removed.
Influenza Continues to Wane, but NOT Death toll
Influenza activity continues to decline in the
United States even as the death toll, which lags behind the infection
rate, continues to rise, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) said today.
Through the third week of 2013, ending on January 19, the percentage of deaths attributed to influenza and pneumonia in 122 benchmark cities rose to 9.8% from 8.3% the week before, according to the CDC's latest report on the 2012-2013 influenza season. The epidemic threshold for such deaths is 7.3%. Likewise, the number of hospitalizations associated with laboratory-confirmed influenza rose from 18.8 per 100,000 population in the second week of 2013 to 22.2 in the third week (both figures are cumulative through the entire influenza season).
Both mortality and hospitalization rates have been steadily climbing in January, whereas indicators of influenza activity have tailed off. The percentage of respiratory specimens that test positive for influenza shrank for 2 weeks straight, going from 29.4% in week 2 of 2013 to 26.1% in week 3. In addition, the percentage of outpatient visits for influenza-like illness (ILI) — defined as fever along with a cough or sore throat — decreased to 4.3%. This figure is still above the national baseline of 2.2%. The number of states reporting high levels of ILI fell to 26.
In a January 18 telebriefing , CDC Director Thomas Frieden, MD, MPH, predicted that the rate of influenza-related hospitalizations and deaths would rise in the coming weeks despite a decline in overall influenza activity. Dr. Frieden attributed the seeming conflict to the time gap between when influenza first strikes and when the disease sends patients to the hospital, where some eventually die.
Table. Influenza Now Accounts for More Than 1 in 5 Hospitalizations
Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
More information on the latest developments in the 2012-2013 influenza season is available in Flu View, a weekly surveillance report from the CDC.
Through the third week of 2013, ending on January 19, the percentage of deaths attributed to influenza and pneumonia in 122 benchmark cities rose to 9.8% from 8.3% the week before, according to the CDC's latest report on the 2012-2013 influenza season. The epidemic threshold for such deaths is 7.3%. Likewise, the number of hospitalizations associated with laboratory-confirmed influenza rose from 18.8 per 100,000 population in the second week of 2013 to 22.2 in the third week (both figures are cumulative through the entire influenza season).
Both mortality and hospitalization rates have been steadily climbing in January, whereas indicators of influenza activity have tailed off. The percentage of respiratory specimens that test positive for influenza shrank for 2 weeks straight, going from 29.4% in week 2 of 2013 to 26.1% in week 3. In addition, the percentage of outpatient visits for influenza-like illness (ILI) — defined as fever along with a cough or sore throat — decreased to 4.3%. This figure is still above the national baseline of 2.2%. The number of states reporting high levels of ILI fell to 26.
In a January 18 telebriefing , CDC Director Thomas Frieden, MD, MPH, predicted that the rate of influenza-related hospitalizations and deaths would rise in the coming weeks despite a decline in overall influenza activity. Dr. Frieden attributed the seeming conflict to the time gap between when influenza first strikes and when the disease sends patients to the hospital, where some eventually die.
Table. Influenza Now Accounts for More Than 1 in 5 Hospitalizations
| Characteristics of the 2012-2013 Influenza Season | Week 52, 2012 (ending December 29) | Week 1, 2013 (ending January 5) | Week 2, 2013 (ending January 12) | Week 3, 2013 (ending January 19) |
| Respiratory specimens testing positive for influenza | 31.6% | 32.8% | 29.4% | 26.1% |
| States reporting widespread influenza activity | 41 | 47 | 48 | 47 |
| Deaths attributed to influenza and pneumonia in 122 benchmark cities | 7% | 7.3% | 8.3% | 9.8% |
| Hospitalizations for influenza per 100,000 population (cumulative for influenza season) | 8.1 | 13.3 | 18.8 | 22.2 |
| Outpatient visits for ILI nationwide | 5.6% | 4.8% | 4.6% | 4.3% |
| States reporting high levels of ILI | 29 | 24 | 30 | 26 |
More information on the latest developments in the 2012-2013 influenza season is available in Flu View, a weekly surveillance report from the CDC.
FDA Panel Calls for Greater Restriction on Hydrocodone....
Drugs containing hydrocodone combined with other
analgesics may soon be subject to more stringent prescribing
requirements if the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) accepts the
recommendation of its expert panel to reschedule the widely used drug.
The FDA's Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee voted 19 to 10 in favor of reclassifying hydrocodone-containing compounds from Schedule III drugs under the Controlled Substances Act to Schedule II.
For 2 days, the panel heard impassioned testimony for and against reclassification, with those in favor emphasizing hydrocodone's potential for addiction and abuse, and those against warning that millions of legitimate pain patients would suffer if its availability becomes more limited.
The vote sends a strong message to physicians and the public about the abuse potential of hydrocodone combination products, many of the panel felt. Several mentioned the fact that death rates from hydrocodone combination drug overdoses have tripled during the last 2 decades
"Clearly, the data show the magnitude of the epidemic of misuse, abuse, and diversion of prescription narcotics," said Elaine Morrato, DrPH, from the University of Colorado School of Public Health, in Aurora, in explaining her yes vote.
"For me, the most persuasive argument was that rescheduling is a signal to the public as well as to the medical profession about the abuse potential, and it rights a misperception that hydrocodone combination products are safer options than class IIs when it comes to long-term risk of abuse," Dr. Morrato said.
She added that she was hopeful that "appropriate remedies" would be put in place should the rescheduling be implemented, "so that those who are disadvantaged, such as those who are in rural settings or who may have access problems, aren't disproportionately affected by the change."
Curbing Early Abuse
William Cooper, MD, MPH, professor of pediatrics and preventive medicine at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee, also voted yes for similar reasons.
"I too considered the potential impact on patients and providers, and that is an important issue for us to consider as we move forward," Dr. Cooper said. "But there is clear and compelling evidence that there is severe dependence on these medications among those who abuse them."
He added that, as a pediatrician, "I would urge us from the public health perspective to be mindful that much of our data suggest abuse can begin in adolescents and young adults, and we need to think carefully about prevention measures in this age group and do what we can to prevent this scourge."
Melinda Moore, a physician assistant from Webster, Texas, was against rescheduling because she feared that the burden to patients, especially in rural areas, would be greatly increased.
"The inability to call in prescriptions for the hydrocodone combination was one of my major problems with rescheduling. I felt there were poor data to support the change," she said.
Moore stressed the importance of monitoring drug use and that such monitoring programs should be across state lines and widely used. She also suggested that steps such as electronic prescribing should be in all states for all schedules, including 2 through 5.
Hobson's Choice
Another strong opponent to rescheduling was John Mendelson, MD, from St. Luke's Hospital, San Francisco, California.
"This is a Hobson's choice. There is no good single choice
within this vote, which is unfortunate. I believe that the net result
will be increased prescribing of other C2 drugs which may have greater
abuse liability and actually fuel, rather than reduce, an epidemic in
progress," Dr. Mendelson said. "Illicit opiate use will increase with
dire consequences."
A final complication that is likely from this vote is that some people will be abruptly withdrawn, he predicted.
"We have already heard from dramatic testimony today exactly how dangerous abrupt opiate withdrawal is with later recrudescence to opiate abuse. At least 2 of the deaths that we heard about today were directly related to those issues."
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Meeting of the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee, Silver Spring, Maryland, January 24-25, 2013.
The FDA's Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee voted 19 to 10 in favor of reclassifying hydrocodone-containing compounds from Schedule III drugs under the Controlled Substances Act to Schedule II.
For 2 days, the panel heard impassioned testimony for and against reclassification, with those in favor emphasizing hydrocodone's potential for addiction and abuse, and those against warning that millions of legitimate pain patients would suffer if its availability becomes more limited.
The vote sends a strong message to physicians and the public about the abuse potential of hydrocodone combination products, many of the panel felt. Several mentioned the fact that death rates from hydrocodone combination drug overdoses have tripled during the last 2 decades
"Clearly, the data show the magnitude of the epidemic of misuse, abuse, and diversion of prescription narcotics," said Elaine Morrato, DrPH, from the University of Colorado School of Public Health, in Aurora, in explaining her yes vote.
"For me, the most persuasive argument was that rescheduling is a signal to the public as well as to the medical profession about the abuse potential, and it rights a misperception that hydrocodone combination products are safer options than class IIs when it comes to long-term risk of abuse," Dr. Morrato said.
She added that she was hopeful that "appropriate remedies" would be put in place should the rescheduling be implemented, "so that those who are disadvantaged, such as those who are in rural settings or who may have access problems, aren't disproportionately affected by the change."
Curbing Early Abuse
William Cooper, MD, MPH, professor of pediatrics and preventive medicine at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee, also voted yes for similar reasons.
"I too considered the potential impact on patients and providers, and that is an important issue for us to consider as we move forward," Dr. Cooper said. "But there is clear and compelling evidence that there is severe dependence on these medications among those who abuse them."
He added that, as a pediatrician, "I would urge us from the public health perspective to be mindful that much of our data suggest abuse can begin in adolescents and young adults, and we need to think carefully about prevention measures in this age group and do what we can to prevent this scourge."
Melinda Moore, a physician assistant from Webster, Texas, was against rescheduling because she feared that the burden to patients, especially in rural areas, would be greatly increased.
"The inability to call in prescriptions for the hydrocodone combination was one of my major problems with rescheduling. I felt there were poor data to support the change," she said.
Moore stressed the importance of monitoring drug use and that such monitoring programs should be across state lines and widely used. She also suggested that steps such as electronic prescribing should be in all states for all schedules, including 2 through 5.
Hobson's Choice
Another strong opponent to rescheduling was John Mendelson, MD, from St. Luke's Hospital, San Francisco, California.
A final complication that is likely from this vote is that some people will be abruptly withdrawn, he predicted.
"We have already heard from dramatic testimony today exactly how dangerous abrupt opiate withdrawal is with later recrudescence to opiate abuse. At least 2 of the deaths that we heard about today were directly related to those issues."
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Meeting of the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee, Silver Spring, Maryland, January 24-25, 2013.
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Monday, January 21, 2013
Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Personal growth and insperation!
Today’s side though!
I’m
sitting here pondering all that I have experienced over the year in both my
personal and career life. I have considered all that has occurred and is occurring
and concluded that although I have experienced many trials and tribulations. Nothing
has prepared me for this phase of my life. As a med student I am constantly researching,
memorizing various elements of the human body and the conditions in which the
human body is affected. I spend countless hours studying facts, theory’s,
treatments. And have now resorted to sleeping with my medical books, laptop,
ipad, and cell phone. I have sacrificed
my sleep, social life, and personal time, all in the name of medicine. I guess
the question remains, why do physicians, nurses, bio tech, radiologist, and more
sacrifice themselves, pushing them self to the breaking point in order to heal
anther? What is it that drives a person into the medical field?
I suppose
each of us has our own reasoning as to why we choose to live and thrive within
the medical field. I for one started my journey with wanting nothing more than
to understand the condition that threatens a human body. I was and am fascinated
by the human body. It is the most perfect machine ever built. And just like
other machines, the human body had its defects as well. My thirst, drive, and
need to understand the human body had absolutely nothing to do with the
individual. It was about the condition that affects the body. However, and with
two years remaining. My opinion has since changed. I can pin point the exact
moment in time when my ill sought opinion had shifted. Although, I have had
several patients that where terminally ill, my opinion did not change until I
had my first oncology/palliative care patient.
I was assigned to a patient whom was suffering
from MBC/Lymphoma and was roughly 10 years younger than I. That evening after
being assigned to her, I entered her room with that “standard” meet and great,
make the patient feel important, mentality. An hour and a half had passed and I
had quietly left her room, exited the building, and headed straight to my vehicle
park off in the distant parking lot. After leaving the parking lot, I found
myself crying the entire way home. Until
this day, I cannot tell you exactly what it was about her and or what occurred during
our first encounter that had moved me so much. But over the course of week(s)
and right up to the time of her passing (six weeks totaling), I can honestly
say that I have learned more about the human spirit than any text book,
lecture, professor, attending, and or anyone for that matter, from this single
patient. She was my eye opener.
Today, when asked why the medical
field and why oncology. My answer is always the same. I am blessed to be the
student of what the true meaning of the human spirit and its will to survive.
Those that I come into contact with (patients) have such a profound wisdom regarding
life and the meaning of life that it is something to marvel and envy.
Regardless of their age, I have found all of my patients to have same in-depth
wisdom. I am not sure why or how one finds such wisdom. Perhaps this insight stems from the very real
reality of their destiny. Unlike the mainstream population, the individuals
(patients) I am in contact with. Do not have the rose color glasses. They see
themselves and the world in which they reside in as is rather then what will
be. I would like to believe that it is because many of them have already found
their peace spiritually, mentally, and physically (if there is such a thing).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)