Search This Blog

Thursday, April 4, 2019

Health Canada plans to suspend Allergan’s breast implant license

Health Canada plans to suspend the license for Allergan Plc’s Biocell breast implant due to the risk of a rare cancer linked to such implants, the regulator said in a notice to the Botox-maker on Thursday.

Breast augmentation using implants is a popular form of cosmetic surgery but regulators are studying textured implants, which have a rough surface, and their possible link to anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL).
Allergan has 15 days to respond to Health Canada, after which the regulator would suspend the license to sell the implants, if the company’s response is not satisfactory, the agency said.
Allergan is reviewing Health Canada’s notice and intends to respond within the deadline, a company spokeswoman said.
About 28 cases of breast implant-associated ALCL have been brought to the notice of Health Canada, out of which 24 involved the Biocell breast implant, the agency said.
The health regulator said its move followed the completion of its assessment of textured breast implants as part of a larger ongoing safety review.
Allergan’s Biocell implant is the only macro-textured device available in Canada.
Advisers to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration last week concluded a two-day hearing about the pros and cons of breast implants. The agency has not yet proposed any change to how implants are used on the basis of the recommendations of the advisers.
Allergan stopped the sale of its textured breast implants in Europe in December, a day after they were recalled by France’s National Agency for the Safety of Medicines & Health Products due to non-renewal of their safety certification by another agency.

Merrimack to discontinue development of MM-310

Merrimack announced the company is discontinuing development of MM-310, its antibody-directed nanotherapeutic for the treatment of solid tumors. This decision was the result of a comprehensive review of available safety data from its Phase 1 study. Based on emerging data since the recent amendment of the clinical protocol, the company has concluded that the study would not be able to reach an optimal therapeutic index for MM-310. Merrimack has terminated the study and expects to initiate a workforce reduction as it closes out clinical activities, reflective of its narrowed preclinical pipeline and in line with prior cost-cutting measures. “We are disappointed that amending the trial protocol does not appear to have solved the cumulative toxicity observed in patients treated with MM-310,” said Sergio Santillana, M.D., M.Sc., Chief Medical Officer of Merrimack. “However, we are grateful to our investigators and patients for their commitment to cancer research, and to our team for all their efforts in supporting the development and clinical evaluation of MM-310.” “Due to our ongoing exploration of strategic alternatives and given these unfortunate challenges in identifying a clinically meaningful safety profile for MM-310, we have decided to halt further development of the program,” said Richard Peters, M.D., Ph.D., President & Chief Executive Officer of Merrimack. “Additionally, as we have narrowed the scope of our pipeline to our two most promising preclinical programs, MM-401 and MM-201, we are initiating steps to close out remaining clinical activities in order to further preserve our resources. We continue to prudently advance these programs as we work expeditiously to bring our ongoing strategic process to conclusion.” In November, Merrimack announced the observation of emerging cumulative grade 3 peripheral neuropathy in three solid tumor patients following multiple cycles of treatment with MM-310 and amended the clinical protocol to extend the dosing schedule from an every three week to an every four week regimen, tightened inclusion and exclusion criteria and implemented proactive dose-reduction rules at the first signs of peripheral neuropathy. Despite the amended protocol, emerging data show MM-310 administered every four weeks continues to result in significant cumulative peripheral neuropathy, which precludes the study from reaching an optimal therapeutic index for MM-310. Merrimack plans to work swiftly to close out clinical activities and carry out associated cost-cutting measures and expects to provide an update on these efforts with its first quarter 2019 financial results. Additionally, in light of its ongoing strategic process, the Company continues to prudently advance its preclinical immuno-oncology pipeline: MM-401, an agonistic antibody targeting a novel immuno-oncology target, TNFR2; and MM-201, a highly stabilized agonist-Fc fusion protein targeting death receptors 4 and 5. Encouraging data from both programs were presented at the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting held March 29 – April 3 in Atlanta, GA.
https://thefly.com/landingPageNews.php?id=2888897

Piper maintains Overweight rating, $3 target on Aveo after stock sale

Piper Jaffray analyst Edward Tenthoff maintains his Overweight rating and $3 price target on Aveo Pharmaceuticals after the company “opportunistically” raised $25M by issuing 21.7M shares at $1.15 per share and 21.7M in warrants with a $1.25 strike price. The analyst, who estimates that Aveo now holds pro forma cash of about $57M, said the primary driver for the stock remains the OS analysis for TIVO-3 that is scheduled to be reported in Q4. If the hazard ratio does not drop to less than 1.0 for tivozanib, Tenthoff does not believe the FDA will accept a new NDA filing, he noted

Acceleron discontinues Phase 1 Molecule ACE-2494 program

Acceleron announced it is discontinuing development of ACE-2494, a systemic muscle agent the company had been studying in a Phase 1 healthy volunteer trial for the potential treatment of neuromuscular disorders. “Although ACE-2494 showed promising early signs of target engagement in our recently completed Phase 1 trial, the frequency of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) observed among participants has led us to discontinue the program,” said Habib Dable, President and Chief Executive Officer of Acceleron. “The formation of ADAs was not associated with any adverse event, but the ADA profile is not consistent with a clinical program that Acceleron would advance. ”

Elite hospitals plunge into unproven stem cell treatments

Hospitals say they’re providing options to patients who have exhausted standard treatments. But critics suggest the hospitals are exploiting desperate patients and profiting from trendy but unproven treatments.


The online video seems to promise everything an arthritis patient could want.
The six-minute segment mimics a morning talk show, using a polished TV host to interview guests around a coffee table. Dr. Adam Pourcho extols the benefits of stem cells and “regenerative medicine” for healing joints without surgery. Pourcho, a sports medicine specialist, says he has used platelet injections to treat his own knee pain, as well as a tendon injury in his elbow. Extending his arm, he says, “It’s completely healed.”
Brendan Hyland, a gym teacher and track coach, describes withstanding intense heel pain for 18 months before seeing Pourcho. Four months after the injections, he says, he was pain-free and has since gone on a 40-mile hike.
“I don’t have any pain that stops me from doing anything I want,” Hyland says.
The video’s cheerleading tone mimics the infomercials used to promote stem cell clinics, several of which have recently gotten into hot water with federal regulators, said Dr. Paul Knoepfler, a professor of cell biology and human anatomy at the University of California-Davis School of Medicine. But the marketing video wasn’t filmed by a little-known operator.
It was sponsored by Swedish Medical Center, the largest nonprofit health provider in the Seattle area.
Swedish is one of a growing number of respected hospitalsand health systems — including the Mayo Clinic, the Cleveland Clinic and the University of Miami — that have entered the lucrative business of stem cells and related therapies, including platelet injections. Typical treatments involve injecting patients’ joints with their own fat or bone marrow cells, or with extracts of platelets, the cell fragments known for their role in clotting blood. Many patients seek out regenerative medicine to stave off surgery, even though the evidence supporting these experimental therapies is thin at best, Knoepfler said.
Hospitals say they’re providing options to patients who have exhausted standard treatments. But critics suggest the hospitals are exploiting desperate patients and profiting from trendy but unproven treatments.
The Food and Drug Administration is attempting to shut down clinics that hawk unapproved stem cell therapies, which have been linked to several cases of blindness and at least 12 serious infections. Although doctors usually need preapproval to treat patients with human cells, the FDA has carved out a handful of exceptions, as long as the cells meet certain criteria, said Barbara Binzak Blumenfeld, an attorney who specializes in food and drug law at Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney in Washington.
Hospitals like Mayo are careful to follow these criteria, to avoid running afoul of the FDA, said Dr. Shane Shapiro, program director for the Regenerative Medicine Therapeutics Suites at Mayo Clinic’s campus in Florida.

‘EXPENSIVE PLACEBOS’

While hospital-based stem cell treatments may be legal, there’s no strong evidence they work, said Leigh Turner, an associate professor at the University of Minnesota’s Center for Bioethics who has published a series of articles describing the size and dynamics of the stem cell market.
“FDA approval isn’t needed and physicians can claim they aren’t violating federal regulations,” Turner said. “But just because something is legal doesn’t make it ethical.”
For doctors and hospitals, stem cells are easy money, Turner said. Patients typically pay more than $700 a treatment for platelets and up to $5,000 for fat and bone marrow injections. As a bonus, doctors don’t have to wrangle with insurance companies, which view the procedures as experimental and largely don’t cover them.
“It’s an out-of-pocket, cash-on-the-barrel economy,” Turner said. Across the country, “clinicians at elite medical facilities are lining their pockets by providing expensive placebos.”
Some patient advocates worry that hospitals are more interested in capturing a slice of the stem-cell market than in proving their treatments actually work.
“It’s lucrative. It’s easy to do. All these reputable institutions, they don’t want to miss out on the business,” said Dr. James Rickert, president of the Society for Patient Centered Orthopedics, which advocates for high-quality care. “It preys on people’s desperation.”
In a joint statement, Pourcho and Swedish defended the online video.
“The terminology was kept simple and with analogies that the lay person would understand,” according to the statement. “As with any treatment that we provide, we encourage patients to research and consider all potential treatment options before deciding on what is best for them.”
But Knoepfler said the guests on the video make several “unbelievable” claims.
At one point, Dr. Pourcho says that platelets release growth factors that tell the brain which types of stem cells to send to the site of an injury. According to Pourcho, these instructions make sure that tissues are repaired with the appropriate type of cell, and “so you don’t get, say, eyeball in your hand.”
Knoepfler, who has studied stem cell biology for two decades, said he has never heard of “any possibility of growing eyeball or other random tissues in your hand.” Knoepfler, who wrote about the video in February on his blog, The Niche, said, “There’s no way that the adult brain could send that kind of stem cells anywhere in the body.”
The marketing video debuted in July on KING-TV, a Seattle station, as part of a local lifestyles show called “New Day Northwest.” Although much of the show is produced by the KING 5 news team, some segments — like Pourcho’s interview — are sponsored by local advertisers, said Jim Rose, president and general manager of KING 5 Media Group.
After being contacted by KHN, Rose asked Swedish to remove the video from YouTube because it wasn’t labeled as sponsored content. Omitting that label could allow the video to be confused with news programming. The video now appears only on the KING-TV website, where Swedish is labeled as the sponsor.
“The goal is to clearly inform viewers of paid content so they can distinguish editorial and news content from paid material,” Rose said. “We value the public’s trust.”

INCREASING SCRUTINY

Federal authorities have recently begun cracking down on doctors who make unproven claims or sell unapproved stem cell products.
In October, the Federal Trade Commission fined stem cell clinics millions of dollars for deceptive advertising, noting that the companies claimed to be able to treat or cure autism, Parkinson’s disease and other serious diseases.
In a recent interview Scott Gottlieb, the FDA commissioner, said the agency will continue to go after what he called “bad actors.”
With more than 700 stem cell clinics in operation, the FDA is first targeting those posing the biggest threat, such as doctors who inject stem cells directly into the eye or brain.
“There are clearly bad actors who are well over the line and who are creating significant risks for patients,” Gottlieb said.
Gottlieb, set to leave office April 5, said he’s also concerned about the financial exploitation of patients in pain.
“There’s economic harm here, where products are being promoted that aren’t providing any proven benefits and where patients are paying out-of-pocket,” Gottlieb said.
Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said there is a broad “spectrum” of stem cell providers, ranging from university scientists leading rigorous clinical trials to doctors who promise stem cells are “for just about anything.” Hospitals operate somewhere in the middle, Marks said.
“The good news is that they’re somewhat closer to the most rigorous academics,” he said.
The Mayo Clinic’s regenerative medicine program, for example, focuses conditions such as arthritis, where injections pose few serious risks, even if that’s not yet the standard of care, Shapiro said.
Rickert said it’s easy to see why hospitals are eager to get in the game.
The market for arthritis treatment is huge and growing. At least 30 million Americans have the most common form of arthritis, with diagnoses expected to soar as the population ages. Platelet injections for arthritis generated more than $93 million in revenue in 2015, according to an article last year in The Journal of Knee Surgery.
“We have patients in our offices demanding these treatments,” Shapiro said. “If they don’t get them from us, they will get them somewhere else.”
Doctors at the Mayo Clinic try to provide stem cell treatments and similar therapies responsibly, Shapiro said. In a paper published this year, Shapiro described the hospital’s consultation service, in which doctors explain patients’ options and clear up misconceptions about what stem cells and other injections can do. Doctors can refer patients to treatment or clinical trials.
“Most of the patients do not get a regenerative [stem cell] procedure,” Shapiro said. “They don’t get it because after we have a frank conversation, they decide, ‘Maybe it’s not for me.'”

LOTS OF HYPE, LITTLE PROOF

Although some hospitals boast of high success rates for their stem cell procedures, published research often paints a different story.
The Mayo Clinic website says that 40 to 70% of patients “find some level of pain relief.” Atlanta-based Emory Healthcareclaims that 75 to 80% of patients “have had significant pain relief and improved function.” In the Swedish video, Pourcho claims “we can treat really any tendon or any joint” with PRP.
The strongest evidence for PRP is in pain relief for arthritic knees and tennis elbow, where it appears to be safe and perhaps helpful, said Dr. Nicolas Piuzzi, an orthopedic surgeon at the Cleveland Clinic.
But PRP hasn’t been proven to help every part of the body, he said.
PRP has been linked to serious complications when injected to treat patellar tendinitis, an injury to the tendon connecting the kneecap to the shinbone. In a 2013 paper, researchers described the cases of three patients whose pain got dramatically worse after PRP injections. One patient lost bone and underwent surgery to repair the damage.
“People will say, ‘If you inject PRP, you will return to sports faster,'” said Dr. Freddie Fu, chairman of orthopedic surgery at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. “But that hasn’t been proven.”
2017 study of PRP found it relieved knee pain slightly better than injections of hyaluronic acid. But that’s nothing to brag about, Rickert said, given that hyaluronic acid therapy doesn’t work, either. While some PRP studies have shown more positive results, Rickert notes that most were so small or poorly designed that their results aren’t reliable.
In its 2013 guidelines for knee arthritis, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons said it is “unable to recommend for or against” PRP.
“PRP is sort of a ‘buyer beware’ situation,” said Dr. William Li, president and CEO of the Angiogenesis Foundation, whose research focuses on blood vessel formation. “It’s the poor man’s approach to biotechnology.”
Tests of other stem cell injections also have failed to live up to expectations.
Shapiro published a rigorously designed study last year in Cartilage, a medical journal, that found bone marrow injections were no better at relieving knee pain than saltwater injections. Rickert noted that patients who are in pain often get relief from placebos. The more invasive the procedure, the stronger the placebo effect, he said, perhaps because patients become invested in the idea that an intervention will really help. Even saltwater injections help 70% of patients, Fu said.
A 2016 review in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery concluded that “the value and effective use of cell therapy in orthopaedics remain unclear.” The following year, a review in the British Journal of Sports Medicine concluded, “We do not recommend stem cell therapy” for knee arthritis.
Shapiro said hospitals and health plans are right to be cautious.
“The insurance companies don’t pay for fat grafting or bone-marrow aspiration, and rightly so,” Shapiro said. “That’s because we don’t have enough evidence.”
Rickert, an orthopedist in Bedford, Ind., said fat, bone marrow and platelet injections should be offered only through clinical trials, which carefully evaluate experimental treatments. Patients shouldn’t be charged for these services until they’ve been tested and shown to work.
Orthopedists — surgeons who specialize in bones and muscles — have a history of performing unproven procedures, including spinal fusion, surgery for rotator cuff disease and arthroscopy for worn-out knees, Turner said. Recently, studies have shown them to be no more effective than placebos.

MISLEADING MARKETING

Some argue that joint injections shouldn’t be marketed as stem cell treatments at all.
Piuzzi said he prefers to call the injections “orthobiologics,”noting that platelets are not even cells, let alone stem cells. The number of stem cells in fat and bone marrow injections is extremely small, he said. In fat tissue, only about 1 in 2,000 cells is a stem cell, according to a March paper in The Bone & Joint Journal. Stem cells are even rarer in bone marrow, where 1 in 10,000 to 20,000 cells is a stem cell.
Patients are attracted to regenerative medicine because they assume it will regrow their lost cartilage, Piuzzi said. There’s no solid evidence that the commercial injections used today spur tissue growth, Piuzzi said. Although doctors hope that platelets will release anti-inflammatory substances, which could theoretically help calm an inflamed joint, they don’t know why some patients who receive platelet injections feel better, but others don’t.
So, it comes as no surprise that many patients have trouble sorting through the hype.
Florida resident Kathy Walsh, 61, said she wasted nearly $10,000 on stem cell and platelet injections at a Miami clinic, hoping to avoid knee replacement surgery.
When Walsh heard about a doctor in Miami claiming to regenerate knee cartilage with stem cells, “it seemed like an answer to a prayer,” said Walsh, of Stuart, Fla. “You’re so much in pain and so frustrated that you cling to every bit of hope you can get, even if it does cost you a lot of money.”
The injections eased her pain for only a few months. Eventually, she had both knees replaced. She has been nearly pain-free ever since. “My only regret,” she said, “is that I wasted so much time and money.”

AHA: ‘Drastic’ income, health differences in hospital outpatients, ASC patients

Hospitals push back against CMS’s policy shift on site-neutral payments for outpatient services.


KEY TAKEAWAYS

CMS in its 2019 Outpatient Prospective Payment System final rule calls for hospital outpatient departments to be paid at a rate equivalent to the Physician Fee Schedule for clinic visits.
That rate is 40% less than hospitals’ current reimbursement.
Medicare patients using hospital outpatients clinic are more likely to be poorer, sicker, and have been previously hospitalized than Medicare patients treated in ambulatory surgical centers, an American Hospital Association-commissioned study says.
The findings by hospital stakeholders come as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services initiates site-neutral payments for Medicare that would pay hospitals the same as ASCs and other care venues.
“Proposals that treat hospital outpatient departments the same as ambulatory surgical centers and other sites of care are misguided, and ignore the healthcare needs of the patients and communities we serve,” AHA President and CEO Rick Pollack said Thursday in a media release accompanying the study, which was conducted for the AHA by KNG Health Consulting LLC.
The change, which came in the 2019 Outpatient Prospective Payment System final rule, calls for hospital outpatient departments to be paid at a rate equivalent to the Physician Fee Schedule for clinic visits. That’s 40% less than their current reimbursement.


In December, the AHA and the Association of American Medical Colleges, and three hospitals, filed a lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services over the policy shift, calling it “an unprecedented assertion of the agency’s authority.”
The lawsuit argues that CMS is acting outside the law to make this harmful policy change.
According to the AHA study, relative to those seen in an ASC, Medicare patients seen in HOPDs are more likely to be:
  • From lower-income areas;
  • Under 65 (individuals with disabilities, end-stage renal disease, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) and over 85;
  • Burdened with more severe chronic conditions;
  • Previously hospitalized;
  • Eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid;
  • Previously cared for in an emergency department or short-term acute care hospital setting, thereby having higher Medicare spending prior to receiving ambulatory care.
AHA says Medicare already reimburses hospitals less than the cost of providing the care, even as hospitals are held to higher and more comprehensive licensing, accreditation and regulatory requirements than freestanding physician offices or ACSs.
In 2017, for example, Medicare margins for outpatient services were negative 12.8%, and overall, Medicare margins were a record low of negative 9.9%, AHA said.

Appaloosa issues supplemental presentation in response to Allergan filing

Appaloosa issued a supplemental presentation in response to Allergan’s April 2 filing regarding Appaloosa’s proposal to separate the roles of Chairman and CEO.