a d v e r t i s e m e n t

The Diabetes Community Appeal to the FDA: Don’t Slam the Door on Progress!

Per my recent post on the troubles at the FDA, we’ve launched an online letter and petition titled, “Ask the FDA to Better Serve Diabetes Patients’ Needs,” that we’re asking everyone to sign.  The website is fittingly called Heal-the-FDA. Please go and have a look.

You will see that we have a growing list of supporters, including politically-minded D-blogger Scott Strumello, who flagged this issue last summer; Dr. Steven Edelman, founder of TCOYD; pumping expert Virginia Valentine; fellow diabetes journalist David Mendosa; Dr. Irl Hirsch, Professor of Medicine at the University of Washington; Dr. Lois Jovanovic, CEO and Chief Scientific Officer of the Sansum Diabetes Research Institute; Dr. Francine Kaufman, Professor of Pediatrics at the Keck School of Medicine; and many other prominent physicians and patient community leaders.  Why are we all putting our names to this appeal to the FDA?

Here’s the long and short of it:

You may have read that the FDA is now demanding that all new diabetes drugs be tested for cardiovascular risks.   While this sounds reasonable on the surface, in the words of our appeal, what they’re actually doing is creating excessive regulatory hurdles that serve only to ensure the continued use of the very drugs and devices that have proven ineffective for so many patients.

“We see no value in the perfect diabetes drug or device, or even a very good one, if the regulatory costs are so great that the product never makes it to market. Therefore we hereby urge the new FDA leadership to make the rules reasonable!  We urge them recognize that a greater emphasis needs to be placed on improving treatment options for diabetes. This can benefit patients without sacrificing their safety.”

What we’re actually asking is that FDA consider immediately creating a “Diabetes Advisory Council” whose goal would be to improve options for patients. This council would include practicing endocrinologists, diabetes educators and others communicating directly with patients.  Rather than only taking advice from researchers entrenched in their respective “ivory towers,” we’re imploring the FDA to tap into the D-community’s experience, focus, and keen awareness of patient needs, as it faces the arduous process of evaluating new diabetes treatments.  They are currently too far removed from actual patient concerns.

But don’t just take my word for it.  Late last week I was lucky enough to chat with Rebecca Killion, one of a very small group of Patient Representatives who works directly with the FDA representing our needs (who’s now also a co-sponsor of the petition!).  Rebecca has diabetes (a LADA like me) and sits on the FDA’s Endocrinology Advisory Committee; she was involved in both the controversial Avandia review and the meeting last summer about heart risk of diabetes drugs that is the issue here.  She has this to say:

“Of course we don’t want a drug that is clearly harmful to patients to go to market, but… the FDA is operating in a climate of fear right now, so the pendulum has swung to the extreme of over-caution.”

“Mainstream media is all corporate-driven and sensationalized; they’re reporting ‘these drugs will kill you!‘ But in fact, it’s pretty unreasonable to require cardiac testing in Phase 2 and 3 trials for drugs that gave off no cardiac signals in Phase 1.  Are we putting these burdens on other drugs?”

“There’s just no way this move is not going to create a chilling effect in terms of slowing development and delaying bringing new diabetes drugs to market.  And we patients are the ones who are going to suffer from these unintended consequences…”

“So how do we counteract that? How do we as patients get our voices heard?  Get your voice heard!”

Well, the online petition is a strong grassroots start.  Our goal is 20,000 signatures! Please consider signing.  Also, you can watch Manny’s TuDiabetes video on the petition effort HERE.

[Editor's note: look for a more detailed personal interview with Rebecca Killion here soon]

Explore posts in the same categories: D-News Examined, Health 2.0

Comments

  1. One of the interesting and well-known observations regarding the FDA boondoggles (and they go well beyond “cardiovascular effect testing”) is that under today’s regulations, aspirin — which has been GRAS (Generally Regarded As Safe) for many, many years — could not pass the FDA approval process.

    Another observation, made several places by Dr. Mary Ruwart (research pharmacologist turned political activist) is that — again, even before the cardiovascular-improvement requirement — the FDA’s approval process more than doubles (almost trebles) the amount of time it takes to get a drug from development to market, ignores anything that does not come out of Big Pharma (with Big Graft attached to it!), and kills many, many more people than it saves.

  2. Diabetes, unlike many other diseases, has a strong association with cardiovascular disease. Why shouldn’t drugs intended for treatment of diabetes be given the added scrutiny to help protect patients from risk.
    I suspect that the “mainstream corporate driven Media” and the altruistic pharmaceutical industry may cancel each other.

  3. I am in support of patient needs awareness by the FDA as described by the petition, but it is unclear to me why we wouldn’t support more scrutiny, as the above commenter also states, into the association between type 2 drugs and cardiovascular events. The letter that I read seemed to be specific to type 2 drugs and the patient population those will serve do have a much increased risk of cardiovascular events. I haven’t been able to find a clear explanation on what makes these new requirements over the top, other than that they will be costly & take time. With the large & increasing number of type 2 patients out there, there will be a market that will attract new drugs, it seems, even if it is pricey getting the testing done. Personally, I have some loved ones with type 2 diabetes and I have worried about the side-effects–in particular, cardiovascular effects–they may be experiencing from the drugs they are taking. Because past drugs slipped through the cracks, it doesn’t seem to me like they shouldn’t be more careful in the future.

    On the more general issue of patient advocacy and the FDA, I am all for it. But I’d rather (or in the specific case of type 2 drugs, I’d rather my loved ones) wait a year or two than be the guinea pig for the FDA. If there is a clear explanation of exactly why the requirements are so unreasonable, I’d like to see it, since I am not an expert in that!

    Thanks,
    Anne

  4. Maybe someone could explain how these drugs are checked for cardiac safety in phase 1?

Trackbacks

  1. SugarStats.com - Simple, Online Blood Sugar Tracking for Diabetes Management » Blog Archive » Healing the FDA: Ask the FDA to Better Serve Diabetes Patient Needs
  2. Paula’s Point of View » Blog Archive » Read and Sign the Petition to the FDA
  3. » Rebecca Killion: An FDA Patient Rep with Diabetes Speaks Out - DiabetesMine: the all things diabetes blog
  4. » Rebecca Killion: An FDA Patient Rep with Diabetes Speaks Out - DiabetesMine: the all things diabetes blog

Comment:



ABOUT AMY TENDERICH, DIABETESMINE™

  • Advertisement

  • Kudos





    "Wonderful"
    — Brian Klepper, TheHealthCareBlog.com


    "Straight from the heart and creatively written"
    — Paul Chaney, The Diabetes Blog


    "Recommended Reading"
    — MEDBLOG, Germany


    "Good info!"
    — Dr.T. Steven Roosevelt, Endo-Blog


    "Debunking the myths that physicians know everything. A+"
    — Dr. Jacob Reider, Family Medicine Notes

  • Content Rights

  • Disclaimer

    I am not now, nor ever will be, a medical professional. So nothing here qualifies as certified medical advice. I am simply a highly inquisitive patient-journalist with respectable ethics :)

    WEB SITE POLICIES

    DISCLOSURES

    This website is certified by Health On the Net Foundation. Click to verify. This site complies with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information: verify here.


    • Perspective, Confidentiality, Disclosure, Reliability, Courtesy



    BlogWithIntegrity.com

  • Donate

  • D-Chat Forums

  • Join Up!

  • Trackers



    Diabetes Blog Directory

    My Technorati Profile
  • Follow me…

    Follow DiabetesMine on Twitter


  • WATCH MY VIDEOS


  •