The Prevalence and Cost of Unapproved Uses of Top-Selling Orphan Drugs

Introduction: The Orphan Drug Act encourages drug development for rare conditions. However, some orphan drugs become top sellers for unclear reasons. We sought to evaluate the extent and cost of approved and unapproved uses of orphan drugs with the highest unit sales. Methods We assessed prescription patterns for four top-selling orphan drugs: lidocaine patch (Lidoderm) approved for post-herpetic neuralgia, modafinil (Provigil) approved for narcolepsy, cinacalcet (Sensipar) approved for hypercalcemia of parathyroid carcinoma, and imatinib (Gleevec) approved for chronic myelogenous leukemia and gastrointestinal stromal tumor. We pooled patient-specific diagnosis and prescription data from two large US state pharmaceutical benefit programs for the elderly. We analyzed the number of new and total patients using each drug and patterns of reimbursement for approved and unapproved uses. For lidocaine patch, we subcategorized approved prescriptions into two subtypes of unapproved uses: neuropathic pain, for which some evidence of efficacy exists, and non-neuropathic pain. Results: We found that prescriptions for lidocaine patch, modafinil, and cinacalcet associated with non-orphan diagnoses rose at substantially higher rates (average monthly increases in number of patients of 14.6, 1.45, and 1.58) than prescriptions associated with their orphan diagnoses (3.12, 0.24, and 0.03, respectively (p75%). Increases in lidocaine patch use for non-neuropathic pain far exceeded neuropathic pain (10.2 vs. 3.6 patients, p<0.001). Discussion In our sample, three of four top-selling orphan drugs were used more commonly for non-orphan indications. These orphan drugs treated common clinical symptoms (pain and fatigue) or laboratory abnormalities. We should continue to monitor orphan drug use after approval to identify products that come to be widely used for non-FDA approved indications, particularly those without adequate evidence of efficacy

Effects of Anacetrapib in Patients with Atherosclerotic Vascular Disease

BACKGROUND: Patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease remain at high risk for cardiovascular events despite effective statin-based treatment of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels. The inhibition of cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) by anacetrapib reduces LDL cholesterol levels and increases high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels. However, trials of other CETP inhibitors have shown neutral or adverse effects on cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 30,449 adults with atherosclerotic vascular disease who were receiving intensive atorvastatin therapy and who had a mean LDL cholesterol level of 61 mg per deciliter (1.58 mmol per liter), a mean non-HDL cholesterol level of 92 mg per deciliter (2.38 mmol per liter), and a mean HDL cholesterol level of 40 mg per deciliter (1.03 mmol per liter). The patients were assigned to receive either 100 mg of anacetrapib once daily (15,225 patients) or matching placebo (15,224 patients). The primary outcome was the first major coronary event, a composite of coronary death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization. RESULTS: During the median follow-up period of 4.1 years, the primary outcome occurred in significantly fewer patients in the anacetrapib group than in the placebo group (1640 of 15,225 patients [10.8%] vs. 1803 of 15,224 patients [11.8%]; rate ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.85 to 0.97; P=0.004). The relative difference in risk was similar across multiple prespecified subgroups. At the trial midpoint, the mean level of HDL cholesterol was higher by 43 mg per deciliter (1.12 mmol per liter) in the anacetrapib group than in the placebo group (a relative difference of 104%), and the mean level of non-HDL cholesterol was lower by 17 mg per deciliter (0.44 mmol per liter), a relative difference of -18%. There were no significant between-group differences in the risk of death, cancer, or other serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease who were receiving intensive statin therapy, the use of anacetrapib resulted in a lower incidence of major coronary events than the use of placebo. (Funded by Merck and others; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN48678192 ; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01252953 ; and EudraCT number, 2010-023467-18 .)

The Law and Science of Climate Change Attribution

There is overwhelming scientific agreement that human activities are changing the global climate system and these changes are already affecting human and natural systems. The observational record shows that the planet is getting significantly warmer, with eighteen of the nineteen warmest years on record occurring since 2001. Other observed changes include rising sea levels, ocean warming and acidification, melting sea ice, thawing permafrost, increases in the frequency and severity of extreme events, and a variety of impacts on people, communities, and ecosystems. There are multiple lines of evidence linking these changes to anthropogenic influence on climate

The Law and Science of Climate Change Attribution

There is overwhelming scientific agreement that human activities are changing the global climate system and that these changes are already affecting human and natural systems. Significant advances in climate change detection and attribution science – the branch of science that seeks to isolate the effect of human influence on the climate and related earth systems – have continued to clarify the extent to which anthropogenic climate change causes both slow onset changes and extreme events. The spike in deaths and costs associated with extreme events and the prospect for slow onset changes with irreversible impacts has inspired a marked increase in the number of lawsuits seeking to hold different actors – particularly governments and fossil fuel companies – accountable for their contribution to or failure to take action on climate change. Attribution science is central to recent climate litigation, as it informs discussions of responsibility for climate change. Climate science also plays a central role in policymaking and planning, particularly where decisions need to be made about how to allocate the costs of mitigating and adapting to climate change. This Article describes the role that attribution science has played in recent litigation as well as policymaking and planning activities, and discusses future directions in the law and science of climate change attribution, addressing questions such as how attribution science can better support policymaking and help resolve questions of liability and responsibility for climate change

The Law and Science of Climate Change Attribution

There is overwhelming scientific agreement that human activities are changing the global climate system and that these changes are already affecting human and natural systems. Significant advances in climate change detection and attribution science – the branch of science that seeks to isolate the effect of human influence on the climate and related earth systems – have continued to clarify the extent to which anthropogenic climate change causes both slow onset changes and extreme events. The spike in deaths and costs associated with extreme events and the prospect for slow onset changes with irreversible impacts has inspired a marked increase in the number of lawsuits seeking to hold different actors – particularly governments and fossil fuel companies – accountable for their contribution to or failure to take action on climate change. Attribution science is central to recent climate litigation, as it informs discussions of responsibility for climate change. Climate science also plays a central role in policymaking and planning, particularly where decisions need to be made about how to allocate the costs of mitigating and adapting to climate change. This Article describes the role that attribution science has played in recent litigation as well as policymaking and planning activities, and discusses future directions in the law and science of climate change attribution, addressing questions such as how attribution science can better support policymaking and help resolve questions of liability and responsibility for climate change

Isolated- and Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome related- lateralised overgrowth (hemihypertrophy): Clinical and molecular correlations in 94 individuals.

The congenital imprinting disorder, Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome (BWS) is associated with variable clinical features including hemihypertrophy/lateralised overgrowth (LO) and embryonal tumour predisposition. BWS-associated (epi)genetic alterations occur in a subset of patients with isolated LO (ILO), leading to the concept of BWS spectrum disorder (BWSp). We investigated the relationship between clinical features and molecular diagnostic results in a cohort with LO using the BWSp international consensus group (BWSICG) clinical scoring system. Clinical/molecular findings in 94 previously-unreported patients with LO referred for BWSp molecular studies were reviewed retrospectively. The BWSICG score was assigned and diagnostic rate calculated. BWSp-associated (epi)genetic alteration was identified in 15/94 (16%). The molecular diagnostic rate by MS-MLPA (blood DNA) for BWS-related molecular findings in patients with LO was positively correlated with the BWSICG score. 3/48 with ILO had a molecular alteration. No individuals with ILO had developed an embryonal tumour at last follow up. Among a cohort of individuals with LO referred for BWSp molecular testing, the BWSICG score correlated with diagnostic yield. The embryonal tumour risk in children with ILO and negative molecular testing appeared very low, however longer- and more complete follow up is required to better define tumour risks in this group

ImprintSeq, a novel tool to interrogate DNA methylation at human imprinted regions and diagnose multilocus imprinting disturbance.

PURPOSE: Disruptions of genomic imprinting are associated with congenital imprinting disorders (CIDs) and other disease states, including cancer. CIDs are most often associated with altered methylation at imprinted differentially methylated regions (iDMRs). In some cases, multiple iDMRs are affected causing multilocus imprinting disturbances (MLIDs). The availability of accurate, quantitative, and scalable high-throughput methods to interrogate multiple iDMRs simultaneously would enhance clinical diagnostics and research. METHODS: We report the development of a custom targeted methylation sequencing panel that covered most relevant 63 iDMRs for CIDs and the detection of MLIDs. We tested it in 70 healthy controls and 147 individuals with CIDs. We distinguished loss and gain of methylation per differentially methylated region and classified high and moderate methylation alterations. RESULTS: Across a range of CIDs with a variety of molecular mechanisms, ImprintSeq performed at 98.4% sensitivity, 99.9% specificity, and 99.9% accuracy (when compared with previous diagnostic testing). ImprintSeq was highly sensitive for detecting MLIDs and enabled diagnostic criteria for MLID to be proposed. In a child with extreme MLID profile a probable genetic cause was identified. CONCLUSION: ImprintSeq provides a novel assay for clinical diagnostic and research studies of CIDs, MLIDs, and the role of disordered imprinting in human disease states