Tag: off-label

Businessman's hands typing on laptop keyboard in morning light

Sorry, You Probably Cannot Get MDMA Through Telehealth

Vincent Joralemon Leave a comment

By Vincent Joralemon

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s recent acceptance of an MDMA-assisted therapy New Drug Application has experts buzzing over expanded access to the infamous substance commonly known as “ecstasy” or “molly.” 

Yet, once approved, FDA will put limits on the approved drug. If past psychedelics are any indication, this means that MDMA will probably need to be provided in a clinic under certain protocols. This means patients will need to wait for other MDMA products to complete clinical trials before we’ll see at-home, private use of the drug.

Read More

Doctor working with modern computer interface.

Thank Ketamine for the Telehealth Extension

Vincent Joralemon Leave a comment

By Vincent Joralemon

In my last post, I discussed the rise of psychedelic lobbying — how companies with vested economic interests in psychedelics have applied pressure to shape regulations that favor their business models.

One such initiative — the ketamine therapy industry’s push to extend the COVID-era telemedicine flexibilities for prescriptions of controlled substances — highlights how sophisticated these campaigns can be, and how their impact stretches beyond the psychedelic industry.

Read More

Vial and syringe.

Can Children Consent to the COVID Vaccine? The Case of Foster Care and Juvenile Justice

The Petrie-Flom Center Staff Leave a comment

By Victoria Kalumbi

Despite pediatric COVID-19 vaccine availability, many youth remain unvaccinated, and are thus at higher risk of life-altering outcomes as a result of contracting COVID-19.[1]

Some children may be unvaccinated by no choice of their own, but instead because of decisions made by parents, guardians, or state or local government officials.

In this post, I argue that young people should have the opportunity to consent to vaccines. I focus on the specific case of children in foster care and the juvenile justice system, as they are particularly vulnerable amid the ongoing pandemic. However, the legal and political avenues explored in this piece to ensure that young people have a stake in their health and vaccine status are broadly generalizable to all children.

Read More

Child with bandaid on arm.

Reflections on Procedural Barriers to Pediatric COVID Vaccine Access

The Petrie-Flom Center Staff Leave a comment

By Fatima Khan

When news broke last week that Pfizer-BioNTech was submitting for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) a two-dose COVID vaccine regimen for children under 5 to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), many parents felt a glimmer of hope after a long time.

Up until a few days before, the public was expecting approval to possibly drag into summer. While the regimen would likely require a third dose, it became a possibility that children could start getting some level of protection as early as March. Finally children were acknowledged during a time when their needs have often been neglected or even ignored.

The shift in the FDA’s decision process is a critical moment to reflect on how we got here, and what we should strive for to ensure children aren’t repeatedly left behind amidst our new COVID reality.

Read More

Baby held in someone's arms.

Remember the Babies: The Need for Off-Label Pediatric Use of COVID-19 Vaccines

Carmel Shachar Leave a comment

By Carmel Shachar

As trials stall and the omicron variant surges, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is failing parents by preventing off-label use of our existing COVID-19 vaccines in the under-five set.

The cries of frustration, anger, and fear from parents of small children have reached a new pitch amidst the ruckus of 2022. Parents of children under five years old need to navigate omicron-fueled rising pediatric hospitalization rates while their kids remain entirely unvaccinated. They must also juggle childcare and work responsibilities amid unpredictable, lengthy daycare and schooling closures. Give us the vaccine to help protect our kids, shorten quarantines, and keep children in care they all clamor.

But where are the vaccines for the pediatric set — the same vaccines that have been proven safe, both in adult populations and in older children? So far the story has focused on disappointing efficacy results and delays in studies from Pfizer and Moderna. But that is not the entire explanation for why parents of small children are blocked from vaccinating their offspring.

Read More

Child with bandaid on arm.

Should Vaccinating Children Off-Label Against COVID-19 Be Universally Prohibited?

The Petrie-Flom Center Staff Leave a comment

By Govind Persad, Patricia J. Zettler, and Holly Fernandez Lynch

As children are experiencing the highest rates of COVID-19 in many states, can efforts to universally preclude vaccination of those under 12 until the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) specifically authorizes use in that age group be justified?

In a case commentary published today in Pediatrics, we argue that the answer is no.

This view diverges from the positions of the American Association of Pediatrics, FDA, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In fact, the CDC, which controls the nation’s supply of COVID-19 vaccines, has taken steps to currently ban the practice of vaccinating youth under the age of 12.

We acknowledge that recommendations to widely vaccinate 5-11 year olds should await FDA and CDC guidance (which is expected soon, given upcoming advisory committee meetings). But, especially at the lower dose offered in pediatric clinical trials, we think that off-label pediatric administration of approved COVID-19 vaccines, like Pfizer’s Comirnaty mRNA vaccine, should be treated like other off-label uses and left to the individual risk-benefit judgments of doctors and patients (or here, parents).

Read More

National Survey Suggests that Off-Label Status is Material to Informed Consent

crobertson 2 Comments

By Christopher Robertson

As many readers of this blog know, the FDA requires that, prior to entering the market, companies prove safety and efficacy for each intended use of their products, but physicians are then free to prescribe the products for any other uses.  (Companies are not allowed to promote off-label uses however.)

A recent national survey by Consumer Reports includes two interesting findings:

  1. About two-thirds (63%) of Americans “would not take a doctor prescribed medication that has been approved by the FDA, but not for their specific condition.”
  2. Almost all Americans (94%) “say they have never been told by a physician that a medication they were taking was not approved by the FDA for their condition.”

Patients are right to be skeptical of off-label uses, though they may not appreciate just how common they are.  In fact, most off-label use is unsupported by scientific evidence as to safety and efficacy.  A new report by the FDA illustrates several off-label uses that were subjected to rigorous clinical trials and turned out to be ineffective or dangerous.   For example, Aliskiren is approved for treatment of hypertension and was used off-label for prevention of congestive heart failure (CHF) complications.  A large trial showed that, although it did not significantly improve CHF mortality, it did significantly increase rates of kidney failure for CHF patients.  We do not know how many other off-label uses would fail if similarly tested.   Read More