Prescription drugs costs surge -- again March 29, 2002 Posted: 1:54 PM EST (1854 GMT) http://www.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/03/29/prescription.spending.a p/index.html NEW YORK (AP) -- Spending on prescription drugs surged for the fourth consecutive year, climbing 17.1 percent in 2001, boosted by sales of a relatively small number of expensive drugs. Outpatient prescription drug spending totaled $154.5 billion in 2001, up from $131.9 billion in 2000, according to a study conducted by the Washington D.C.-based National Institute for Health Care Management Research and Educational Foundation, a nonprofit group that conducts research on health care issues. The study found that just 50 drugs out of a total of 9,482 on the retail market, were responsible for 62.3 percent of the $22.5 billion increase in spending last year. Sales of those drugs rose 34.3 percent in 2001 compared to a 9.3 increase for all other drugs. The average price of a prescription for one of the 50 best-selling drugs was $71.56 while the average price for other drugs was $40.11. Leading the list of drugs contributing to the increase were cholesterol treatments Lipitor and Zocor, arthritis drugs Vioxx and Celebrex, pain reliever OxyContin and anti-depressant Celexa. "Once again we see that the rise in pharmaceutical expenditures is led by the increased use of a relatively small number of expensive drugs," says Nancy Chockley, president of the foundation. She said many of the drugs that led to increased sales were the ones most advertised by their manufacturers to both consumers and doctors. Chockley said information about the top-selling drugs is concentrated in the hands of the pharmaceutical industry. "We should be able to be smarter about how we purchase a handful of expensive medicines," she said. Chockley said also that numerous of the 50 drugs are blockbusters with more than $1 billion in sales so they're vital to manufacturers' profits. She said drug companies must be prevented from extended patenting and introducing new drugs that aren't different from their predecessors. "Drug companies spend more of an effort these days maintaining blockbuster drugs," she said.. **** 04/02/2002 - Updated 09:58 PM ET >Plan to end pediatric drug trials draws fire http://www.usatoday.com/news/healthscience/health/drugs/2002 -04-03-children.htm By Marilyn Elias, USA TODAY A firestorm of protest is rising up against a possible Food and Drug Administration plan to suspend a rule that forces drugmakers to do pediatric safety testing of new medicines. Most drugs taken by American kids have only been tested in adults. The 3-year-old rule was aimed at making sure new pediatric drugs were studied in children. But a pending lawsuit charges that the FDA goes beyond its legal authority in ordering drug companies to conduct the tests. On March 18, the FDA asked for a delay in the case until May 10, when it would suspend the testing rule for two years. Then on March 28, the agency issued a "clarification" saying that it "may or may not stay all or part" of the rule and will report its decision by May 10. President Bush and Health and Human Services secretary Tommy Thompson have received letters from federal lawmakers and children's health advocacy groups strongly opposing any suspension of the rule. The FDA is studying how its profit-incentive plan for drugmakers, and a children's drug law passed in January, may be affecting pediatric studies, says Susan Cruzan, FDA spokeswoman. "We're determined to make sure children's medicines are safe and used properly," she says... **** > Poll: Americans' Faith in Clinical Trials Shaken Wed Mar 27, 5:25 PM ET http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=594&u=/nm/2 0020327/hl_nm/trials_risk_1 NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Americans believe clinical trials are important in order to get needed safety and efficacy information on drugs or devices, but they are not fully confident that those who take part in the studies will get the best medical care or be told honestly of all the risks involved, a Harris Interactive survey released Wednesday shows. The results are based on a 6-day survey in February of 2,031 adults aged 18 and older. These people responded to Harris' invitation to participate in an online poll, and are representative of the US population, according to the polling company. Overall, 83% said it is "essential" or "very important" to conduct human studies for new therapies before they are approved. Ninety- two percent said they were somewhat or very confident that patients who take part in the studies contribute to knowledge that will help others in the future. But respondents were slightly less confident that those who participated would be well-treated. Thirty-two percent said they were very confident, and 50% somewhat confident, that study participants would get good medical care. Most thought risks were adequately communicated, but 18% said they were "not confident" that patients were given full disclosure..... **** 03/31/2002 - Updated 08:21 PM ET >Use of smallpox vaccine may be problematic http://www.usatoday.com/news/healthscience/health/bioterroris m/2002-04-01-usat-smallpox-vaccine-full.htm By Anita Manning, USA TODAY The USA is amassing an abundant supply of smallpox vaccine, but health officials say they are not recommending that it be widely used ­ yet. The vaccine currently on hand, 15.4 million doses in a government stockpile and more than 85 million doses that drug maker Aventis Pasteur says it will add to that, is safe and effective but can cause problems, says D.A. Henderson, director of the Office of Public Health Preparedness. Many people develop painful swelling around the site of the inoculation, headache and nausea. In people with weakened immune systems, the live-virus vaccine can cause illness. And in one to two people per million, it can cause death. "When smallpox was around," Henderson says, "the risk was so great, with a 30% death rate, we were prepared to accept a level of complications from the vaccine." Now, he says, "we have to ask the question, what is the risk of smallpox being introduced? We think it's extremely low."... **** >Estrogen Therapy Risk? WASHINGTON, April 2, 2002 (AP / CBS) http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/04/02/health/main50520 7.shtml "Short term use of hormone therapy for treatment of hot flashes should not appreciably increase the risk of these cancers." JoAnn E. Manson (AP) A study shows a modest increased risk of ovarian cancer among women who use some forms of hormone replacement therapy, but researchers say the findings are not strong enough to recommend changes. In the study, which appeared Tuesday in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Swedish researchers report that women using estrogen replacement therapy had a 43 percent increased risk of ovarian cancer, while those combining estrogen with sequential progestins had a 54 percent increased risk. The authors, however, said that the results need to be verified by other researchers and noted: "We advocate cautious interpretations of our results and do not recommend changes to current (hormone replacement therapy) prescribing practices." In absolute numbers, the researchers said, the increased risk of cancer was only modest. For every 1,000 women on hormone therapy, there would be only two to three more cases of ovarian cancer, they said. In Sweden, ovarian cancer is diagnosed in about 1 percent of women between the ages of 50 and 75, irregardless of hormone therapy use, the authors noted.... **** >The Pill, HPV And Cancer LONDON, March 26, 2002 (CBS) http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/03/26/health/main50468 8.shtml "This study suggests that if you've got an HPV infection, oral contraceptives may actually be promoting the rate at which that progresses to cancer." Dr. Jack Cuzick Cancer researcher (CBS) Long-term use of the birth control pill can quadruple the risk of cervical cancer in women infected with the sexually transmitted human papilloma virus (HPV), scientists said Tuesday. Experts say the study supports what many gynecologists have long suspected - that there is a causal connection between the pills and cervical cancer. Previous studies have not ruled out the possibility women who take the pill may simply be more likely to be infected with human papilloma virus, the main cause of the cancer. "This study suggests that if you've got an HPV infection, oral contraceptives may actually be promoting the rate at which that progresses to cancer," said Dr. Jack Cuzick, head of mathematics, statistics and epidemiology at Cancer Research UK in London. He was not connected with the study.....