home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- <text id=94TT1246>
- <title>
- Sep. 19, 1994: Medicine:Let's Not Be Too Hasty
- </title>
- <history>
- TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1994
- Sep. 19, 1994 So Young to Kill, So Young to Die
- </history>
- <article>
- <source>Time Magazine</source>
- <hdr>
- MEDICINE, Page 71
- Let's Not Be Too Hasty
- </hdr>
- <body>
- <p> Activists who once clamored for speedier approval of AIDS drugs
- now favor a more deliberate approach
- </p>
- <p>By Christine Gorman--Reported by Dick Thompson/Washington
- </p>
- <p> Remember when AIDS activists staged die-ins on Wall Street,
- barricaded the doors at the Food and Drug Administration and
- threw smoke bombs at the National Institutes of Health? If there
- was a single, unifying battle cry among protesters, it was the
- charge that the Federal Government's delays in approving experimental
- treatments were responsible for killing thousands of desperately
- ill AIDS patients. Now, a mere two years after the FDA relaxed
- some of its standards and established a "fast track" to rush
- drugs from the test tube to the bedside, a growing number of
- activists are changing their minds. "We were naive," admits
- Spencer Cox, of the New York City-based Treatment Action Group.
- "There are standards for a reason."
- </p>
- <p> Some activists have gone so far as to call for a return to a
- more thorough drug-testing process, even if it means postponing
- the approval of new treatments. Perhaps most stunning of all,
- the activists would agree--under certain conditions--to
- so-called placebo trials, in which some patients receive a sugar
- pill in place of an experimental drug. Just a few years ago,
- activists were unanimous in denouncing such traditional testing
- methods as unethical when it came to the treatment of AIDS.
- But then doctors and patients started to complain that the speeded-up
- approval process didn't provide them with enough information
- to make an intelligent decision about which drug to use.
- </p>
- <p> The turnaround in thinking comes at a particularly crucial time,
- because pharmaceutical manufacturers are getting ready to launch
- a new group of anti-HIV drugs onto the fast track. Their success
- in doing so may hinge on the outcome of an FDA advisory-panel
- meeting that is taking place this week in Rockville, Maryland.
- Panel members are expected to consider the activists' criticisms
- and determine whether the agency's fast track has too many shortcuts
- in it and should be revamped yet again.
- </p>
- <p> As originally conceived, the fast-track process makes a lot
- of sense. The goal is to streamline the necessary steps toward
- FDA approval so that they do not take years to complete. One
- way to accomplish that, the agency decided, was to accept preliminary
- evidence from small clinical trials rather than wait for final
- proof from a comprehensive study. Typically the trials consist
- of a few hundred people and last only a matter of months. In
- return, the pharmaceutical companies were supposed to conduct
- follow-up studies that confirmed their drugs' effectiveness
- after they were out on the market. The FDA held up its side
- of the bargain by approving two new antiviral drugs--ddC and
- d4T--but the follow-up studies have been delayed. Even so,
- it has since become clear that the treatments can trigger severe
- side effects. As a result, no one really knows if the drugs
- are worth the risk.
- </p>
- <p> All the anti-HIV medications approved so far are chemical cousins
- of AZT, the first drug ever shown to put a damper on hiv infection,
- if only temporarily. AZT works by sabotaging an enzyme called
- reverse transcriptase that helps the virus copy itself. But
- the newest group of potential fast trackers, called protease
- inhibitors, interferes with a different part of the virus' reproductive
- cycle. Although protease inhibitors don't seem to slow down
- HIV for long, investigators hope a combination of an older AZT-like
- drug and one of the new pills could prove more effective than
- any single medication.
- </p>
- <p> Under the accelerated approval plan, protease inhibitors could
- get the go-ahead from the FDA without much fuss within months.
- But members of the Treatment Action Group think they have a
- better idea. At this week's meeting of the FDA advisory panel,
- they plan to propose a large-scale, two-year to five-year study
- of the protease inhibitors. The study would include 18,000 participants,
- of whom all would receive standard aids care but only half would
- get a protease inhibitor; the other half would receive a placebo
- instead. Because so many people would be involved for a prolonged
- period, investigators would not have to depend on sketchy evidence
- but could accurately measure real clinical benefits, such as
- weight gain or longer life-span, to determine if protease inhibitors
- are an effective way to combat the AIDS virus.
- </p>
- <p> It is tempting to point to the activists' change in philosophy
- as proof that their earlier zeal was misguided and dangerous
- to their cause. But the truth is that the entire AIDS research
- and medical community has been undergoing an intense period
- of reassessment. Activists were not the only people who assumed
- AIDS would quickly fall before some magic bullet molded by science.
- Perhaps, as that illusion fades, more realistic--and successful--strategies will slowly emerge.
- </p>
- </body>
- </article>
- </text>
-
-