fbpx

Smith & Nephew to Acquire Integra’s Orthopedics Business

Smith & Nephew will acquire Integra LifeSciences’ orthopedics business in a 240 million dollar cash deal set to close at the end of 2020. The focus will be on growing the upper and lower extremity markets, adding products covering shoulder replacements and reconstructions of the hand, wrist, elbow, ankle, and foot. Through the acquisition, Smith & Nephew will also gain access to Integra’s next-generation shoulder replacement system, which is scheduled for a commercial launch in 2022. Additionally, it will bring a strong sales force and distributors to the United States, Canada, and Europe.

About 300 employees are expected to move from Integra, which is based out of Lyon, France, and Austin, Texas. Although sales decreased due to COVID-19 and the postponement of elective surgeries (down 48.6 percent in the second quarter of 2020 versus the same time in 2019), Smith & Nephew anticipates the business to deliver double-digit revenue growth in 2021 and 2022. 

For Integra, the acquisition will allow the company to focus its efforts on developments in neurosurgery, surgical instrumentation, and regenerative medicine. 

Further Reading:

Investigation Continues for AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 Vaccine

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is taking a deeper dive into the investigation of AstraZeneca Plc’s COVID-19 vaccine study and will now look at data from previous trials of similar vaccines developed by the same researchers at Oxford University. Despite taking a closer look, they don’t believe there are any safety issues associated with these vaccines. “It just shows that the FDA is being thorough,” explains a source. 

AstraZeneca’s trial in the U.S. has been on hold since September 6th, when a participant in Britain fell ill with transverse myelitis, a rare spinal inflammatory disorder. Regulators in the United Kingdom, Brazil, India, and South Africa have already resumed studying the efficacy of the vaccine. 

Given the increased FDA investigation, further delays are likely for what was one of the most advanced COVID-19 vaccine studies in the U.S. The additional data requested by the FDA was expected to be delivered in early October and will require time to review.

An effective vaccine is essential for efforts to end the global COVID-19 pandemic that has already killed over one million people. President Donald Trump (who announced that he tested positive for COVID-19 on October 2nd) and his administration have pledged 1.2 billion dollars to support the development of AstraZeneca’s vaccine and to secure 300 million doses for American citizens. Pfizer Inc, Moderna Inc, and Johnson & Johnson are also in the U.S. vaccine race. 

The FDA declined to comment, and Oxford University did not respond to requests. In a statement, AstraZeneca said: “We are continuing to work with the FDA to facilitate review of the information needed to make a decision regarding resumption of the U.S. trial.”

Further Reading:

Can the FDA Be Trusted on a COVID Vaccine? Bill Gates Chimes In

“Bill Gates used to think of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as the world’s premier public-health authority. Not anymore.”

“And he doesn’t trust the Centers for Disease Control and Protection either. Both, in his view, are casualties of a presidency that has downplayed or dismissed science and medicine in the pursuit of political gain. One recent example came when FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn, speaking at one of President Donald Trump’s news conferences, exaggerated the benefit of blood plasma as a treatment for Covid-19, then backtracked the following day.

“We saw with the completely bungled plasma statements that when you start pressuring people to say optimistic things, they go completely off the rails. The FDA lost a lot of credibility there,” Gates, the billionaire philanthropist, said in an interview on Bloomberg Television.

“Historically, just like the CDC was viewed as the best in the world, the FDA had that same reputation as a top-notch regulator,” Gates said. “But there’s been some cracks with some of the things they’ve said at the commissioner level.”

At stake is nothing less than public confidence in the vaccine that could end the coronavirus pandemic, and which the FDA would have to approve. Polls conducted in the past two months show a majority of Americans worry the development of the vaccine is being rushed and a third wouldn’t get inoculated.

To read the full article, please visit here.

‘Very Concerned’ About AstraZeneca Vaccine Side Effect

AstraZeneca vaccine trials continue in the United Kingdom, but U.S. regulators are continuing to investigate.

“The Food and Drug Administration is weighing whether to follow British regulators in resuming a coronavirus vaccine trial that was halted when a participant suffered spinal cord damage, even as the National Institutes of Health has launched an investigation of the case.

“The highest levels of NIH are very concerned,” said Dr. Avindra Nath, intramural clinical director and a leader of viral research at the National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke, an NIH division. “Everyone’s hopes are on a vaccine, and if you have a major complication the whole thing could get derailed.”

To read the full article, please visit The Daily Beast.

White House Meeting With Top Pharmaceutical Executives Is Off

Top pharmaceutical executives planned to meet with the president on Tuesday.

“A White House meeting with top pharmaceutical executives that President Donald Trump promised for Tuesday is off, five industry sources familiar with discussions told POLITICO. Three said the drug-pricing discussion was canceled because the major drug lobbies, reeling from Friday’s cluster of executive orders on the topic, refused to send any members.

Drugmakers and Trump were slated to discuss an executive order, signed Friday but not yet released, that would order health officials to release a plan linking Medicare payments for certain medicines to lower costs paid abroad. The provision, known as a most-favored-nations rule, has been lambasted by the drug industry and some patient groups that say it would curb innovation and reduce drug access.

Trump said Friday that drugmakers would have a month to present a better option to the rule.

The drug lobbies PhRMA and BIO were reluctant to send representatives from their member companies — many of them multibillion-dollar manufacturers of the world’s best-selling medicines and vaccines — after conflicting reports last week about whether the White House would include the rule and little information to date about what the new rule would look like, three people familiar with the discussions said.

To read the full article, please visit Politico.

FDA’s Woodcock Discusses Operation Warp Speed

Operation Warp Speed (OWS)

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Centers for Drug Evaluation and Research Director Janet Woodcock discussed Operation Warp Speed (OWS).

 

Therapeutics Development

Woodcock, who recused herself from FDA’s approval decision, is leading OWS’s effort on therapeutics development. Woodcock said, “Even with success, some people will not respond to vaccines, and some people will not get vaccinated. So, therapeutics will always be needed.” There is hope convalescent plasma could lessen the severity of a COVID-19 infection, but it is still unclear if the therapy works. She noted the limited window to retrieve plasma from recovered COVID-19 patients.

Antibody Development Programs + Protocols

Around 50 monoclonal antibody development programs are currently active. The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority sponsored an antibody treatment developed by Regeneron, which is now in Phase II trials. An Eli Lilly antibody treatment is in a Phase I trial. Officials hope uniform clinical trial designs or “master protocols” will make expectations of drug manufacturers clear, make it easier to compare the safety and efficacy of different treatments and speed the development process.

OWS and the National Institutes of Health developed two master protocols for COVID-19 monoclonal antibody clinical trials. One will test the use of monoclonal antibodies in the outpatient setting, and another is for inpatient use. They are scheduled to start testing this month.

Stay tuned for additional details, and in the meantime …

Dexamethasone Shows Promise for COVID-19 Patients

In June, Oxford University researchers announced preliminary clinical trial results that showed the low-dose steroid dexamethasone appeared to lower the risk of death in COVID-19 patients. Further details of the study were not revealed with the announcement.

Dexamethasone has been effective in treating inflammation related to arthritis, asthma, and similar conditions. With this thought in mind, the clinical trial team wanted to test the drug’s effectiveness in treating lung inflammation in high-risk, hospitalized COVID-19 patients. For the clinical trial participants, it cut the risk of death by a third for patients on ventilators and by a fifth for patients on oxygen. Had the drug been used in the United Kingdom from the start of the outbreak, up to 5,000 lives could have been saved.

Additionally, the adoption of dexamethasone may be a major breakthrough for COVID-19 patients in poorer countries, as it only costs six dollars per patient. It’s also widely available: the United Kingdom currently has 200,000 courses available — enough to handle a potential second wave and spike in hospital admittance.

However, Dr. Kirsten Lyke , an infectious disease specialist at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, believes that we should “be extremely cautious” when using treatments that have not completed a full-scale vetting process. Given the urgency in finding treatment options for COVID-19, “people want to get results out quickly,” she explains. “But at the same time, if things are released too early or there’s harm that occurs from the intervention, that really erodes public trust.”

Read more about Covid-19 and your health, here >

IVC Filters: What you need to know

Potential Risks and Downfalls

Patients who suffer from pulmonary embolisms often are prone to clotting complications which leads to lifelong use of medications such as warfarin or direct oral anticoagulants (blood thinners). Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filters have been shown to be used in preventing pulmonary embolisms when blood thinning therapy has failed or cannot be used due to complications. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has deemed IVC filters to have relatively low morbidity and mortality associated with placement and removal. However, complications have been seen that we will discuss below.

What is a Pulmonary Embolism?

A pulmonary embolism occurs when a blood clot is formed and breaks loose which travels to the lungs through the bloodstream. This can cause chest pain and shortness of breath which are the main signs and symptoms of the disorder. When a blood clot travels to the lungs, it blocks blood flow in the arteries which can cause impaired lung function and eventual lung failure if untreated.

Pulmonary embolisms are responsible for about 100,000 to 200,000 deaths in the United States each year. Unfortunately, many cases are undiagnosed and it is important to understand how you can prevent clotting risks associated with them.

Complications of IVC Filters

An IVC filter consists of a filter being placed inside a large vein called the vena cava; which carries blood from your lower body to your heart and lungs. This is a surgical process consisting of using a camera-guided probe through a vein in your neck. 

In general, there are three complications that can arise during IVC filter placement. The first complication can occur during the access to your vein. There may be unforeseen clots in the access vein which would indicate use of an ultrasound to guide the probe through the vein. The second complication has to do with the placement of the IVC filter. If the filter is placed in a location that doesn’t properly filter the blood, another filter must be placed in the correct location. The third complication arises when the filter does not expand correctly which can lead to poor filtration or dislodging. This means that the filter can migrate to a different part of the vein and need removal. 

Let’s say the IVC filter is correctly placed and the surgical procedure is a success. There are additional risks that can occur afterwards as well. Another clotting condition called a Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) can occur which is a clot that develops in the legs. A study showed that up to 40% of patients can develop a DVT after filter placement. This shows that even with successful placement, there can be risks for additional clotting factors.

There are two different types of filters that can be used based off the severity of risks: temporary or permanent filters. Temporary filters must be removed through another surgical process since they do not contain materials built to last in the body. Permanent filters are indicated for long-term use and are generally not removed unless problems arise. The same risks apply for IVC filter removal as insertion with additional risks which can warrant longer procedure time and non-standard techniques for removal. 

There are other complications that were not discussed that can contribute to other risks regarding IVC filter placement and retrieval. Studies do not have strong data with these other potential risks and were not included for that reason. Studies do suggest that there are higher complications relating to temporary filters, however, based on self-reported rates by patients who have received the surgery.

Defective IVC Filter

Real World Concerns

Due to the risks associated with IVC filter placement, there have been hundreds of injuries and multiple lawsuits involving this procedure. Many cases involved filter fragments breaking off and traveling to different parts of the lungs or heart. This caused punctures and injuries to the local organs as a foreign sharp object floated through the bloodstream. These cases resulted in ongoing health problems for those effected and lifelong medication use. Many IVC filter companies have recalled their products due to these injuries as it became a public concern. The positive outcomes have been limited with these filters and is a reason they are a last line option for pulmonary embolism prevention.

How to Prevent Blood Clots

Preventing blood clots before any complications of a pulmonary embolism is ideal. This can be done by anyone to reduce your risk of a clotting event such as regular exercise, maintaining a healthy body weight, and quitting smoking for those who smoke. Regular exercise should consist of at least 30-minutes of activity 3-5 times a week. A healthy body weight is measured by someone’s body mass index (BMI) which is calculated based off the height and weight of the person. A healthy BMI ranges from 18.5-24.9 in the general public. There are many online calculators you can search for to calculate your BMI. Smoking cigarettes can increase the thickness of your blood putting you at a higher risk for developing a clot. It is important to know that quitting is the best prevention method for current smokers for developing a clot. 

Less common preventative measures that many people may not think of is during long travels. When we are in a seated or laying down position for extended periods of time, our blood does not flow as easily throughout the body. This can lead to blood pooling in the legs creating a clot which can lead to a pulmonary embolism if the clot breaks loose. Best prevention methods for long travels is to stand or walk every hour, drink lots of water, and to not smoke/drink alcohol during travels.

What This Means For You

By now I hope you feel knowledgeable about the many risks associated with IVC filters. It is something that should be avoided if possible when prone to a pulmonary embolism. The preferred method of prevention is through a healthy lifestyle with or without medication management. As discussed, this includes a healthy diet, physical activity, a healthy BMI, and quitting smoking. Medication treatment may require frequent follow-up visits and monitoring but has much more safety information and proven effectiveness. 

IVC filters are a last-ditch effort in most people to prevent a pulmonary embolism when medications don’t work or in emergency situations. It is important to understand the signs and symptoms of the disease and what preventative measures you can make to reduce your risk of a blood clot.

Sources Cited (6)

  1. About Your Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filter Placement. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Revised: March 2019. Accessed November 2019. https://www.mskcc.org/cancer-care/patient-education/ivc-filter-placement
  2. Pai, Menaka; Douketis, James. Prevention of Venous Thromboembolic Disease in Acutely Ill Hospitalized Medical Adults. UpToDate. Hudson, Ohio: Wolters Kluwer Clinical Drug Information, Inc.; 2013; April 15, 2013. Accessed November 2019. https://ntserver1.wsulibs.wsu.edu:2102/contents/prevention-of-venous-thromboembolic-disease-in-acutely-ill-hospitalized-medical-adults?search=prevent%20vte&source=search_result&selectedTitle=1~150&usage_type=default&display_rank=1#H1842903009
  3. Sentry Inferior Vena Cava Filter. Department of Health & Humans Services. Revised: January 2017. Accessed November 2019. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf16/K162875.pdf
  4. Tarbox, Abigail K; Swaroop, Mamta. Pulmonary Embolism. International Journal of Critical Illness and Injury Science. 2013; 3(1): 69-72. Accessed November 2019. doi: 10.4103/2229-5151.109427. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3665123/
  5. Van Ha, Thuong G. Complications of Inferior Vena Caval Filters. Seminars in Interventional Radiology. 2006; 23(2): 150-155. Accessed November 2019. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-941445. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3036364/
  6. Venous Thromboembolism. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Revised: 2017. Accessed November 2019. https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/venous-thromboembolism

Common Heartburn Medication Contains Probable Carcinogen

The FDA has recalled popular over-the-counter and prescription heartburn ranitidine drugs (or otherwise known as Zantac) due to unsafe levels of N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), a probable human carcinogen. This recall came as a result of an ongoing investigation of NDMA discovered in ranitidine medications. 

The investigation into NDMA

In the summer of 2019, it became known that low levels of this substance had been found in ranitidine medicine. Low-levels of this NDMA are often found in food products, but these low levels are not expected to increase the risk of cancer. High levels of exposure to NDMA do increase the risk. Upon discovering the possibility of NDMA in ranitidine, the FDA investigated whether these drugs form NDMA in the human body. The FDA warned the public about the possibility of NDMA in the medication back in September 2019 but did not have enough evidence to issue a mandatory recall. However, the FDA did request a voluntary recall and asked manufacturers to conduct their own laboratory testing and send samples to the FDA.

In April of this year, FDA testing confirmed NDMA levels increase in ranitidine drugs over time, even with normal storage conditions, especially the further the product gets from its date of manufacturing. Also, the NDMA levels increase when the drugs are stored at higher temperatures. 

Many companies did voluntary recalls on the ranitidine products prior to this mandatory recall by the FDA. Sanofi recalled its over-the-counter Zantac in October of last year. Appco Pharma LLC and Northwind Pharmaceuticals did so in January. Many drug stores took action as well, including CVS and Walgreens, who stopped selling Zantac and other ranitidine drugs as of last year.

What to do if you are taking a rantinide drug (Zantac)?

Consumers are being advised to stop taking any current over-the-counter Zantac they currently have and switch to other approved over-the-counter heartburn medicines. For those on prescription Zantac, speak with their healthcare professional immediately about alternative options. When disposing of the medication, the FDA advises consumers and patients to follow the medication disposal information on the packaging included with the medication.

Several drugs that serve the same purpose as ranitidine drugs do not have the same risks from NDMA. At this point, only if a company can prove to the FDA that their ranitidine product is stable and that the NDMA levels do not increase to unsafe levels, will any be back on the market and available to patients and consumers. It’s always essential to stay up to date about the medication you are taking, so check in with the Drug Law Journal for ongoing news and up-to-date information.

How To Determine The Safety Of Children’s Over The Counter Cold Medications

As parents, we know that at some point our children will come down with a cold and we will need to be prepared to help them feel better quickly. Many people go through a variety of over the counter cold and flu medications in an attempt to find just the right remedy to give to their children. Figuring out which medication is right for their symptoms can be a confusing task riddled with possible implications that could have an impact on your child’s health. 

What The FDA Recommends

Pharmacy shelves are packed full of pills and liquids claiming to ease the discomforts of a cold or cough, but as consumers, we are not versed in the ingredients and their possible side effects. Because of this, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has called for caution when it comes to over the counter cold medications. 

These types of medications are no longer recommended for children under the age of four, and the FDA recommends that only under the advice of a physician should children between the ages of four and six take them. 

The reasoning behind the FDA’s recommendation is due to the developmental growth of children, which impacts how their bodies are able to process certain medications. The American Academy of Pediatrics has endorsed these recommendations in an attempt to spare children from the unnecessary and potentially harmful medication related side effects. 

Recalls Of Over The Counter Medications

In addition to the recommendations on over the counter cold medication use for children are the recalls of certain products. Infant Ibuprofen and Children’s Motrin have both undergone recalls of some form. This is not uncommon as oftentimes recalls can be administered to certain include an entire product or merely certain specific lots, typically being triggered by production processes and standards. 

Staying On Top Of The Information

It is important to stay aware of the latest recalls and medical updates when you are choosing what medications to give your child. The Drug Law Journal publishes up to date information regarding all types of medical recalls, warnings, and findings, which makes it an outstanding online resource for parents who want to stay current on medical information that may affect their child’s health. 

Keeping Your Child Healthy 

Any medication you give your child should always undergo careful scrutiny, and it is imperative that instructions are carefully read in order to keep your child safe from harmful side effects. Making our children feel better when they are sick, however, keeping them safe and healthy is the top priority. 

Drug Law Journal Legal Sponsorship

Drug Law Journal's publishing and research are sponsored by the DDP Injury Law Group in Washington, D.C. Their legal team is focused on protecting the rights of injury victims.
Furthermore, they understand and appreciate the importance of a trusted attorney-client relationship.
The DDP Injury Law Group uses their years of experience with litigation to ensure their clients can fight for the compensation they deserve.

Always seek the advice of a medical professional when making personal health choices.

The Offices of DrugLawJournal.com are located at:

1800 North Orange Avenue, Suite C
Orlando, Florida 32804

DrugLawJournal.com is sponsored by the DDP Injury Law Group, and therefore may be considered attorney advertising. The information contained on DrugLawJournal.com is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any subject matter. No viewers of this site should discontinue taking a prescribed medication on the basis of any information on this site and should always first consult with a doctor concerning any medication. Viewers should understand that if they refrain from taking prescribed medication without appropriate medical advice they can suffer injury or death.

No viewers of content from this site, clients or otherwise, should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in the site without seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue from an attorney licensed in the viewer’s state. Viewing information from DrugLawJournal.com does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and DDP Injury Law Group or DrugLawJournal.com nor is it intended to do so.The content of DrugLawJournal.com may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. Prior results do not predict a similar outcome. For more information, please visit our web site’s disclaimer.

©2024 DrugLawJournal.com | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions

Stay Informed

Sign up to receive peroidic updates from our expert team of researchers, highlighting defective drugs, devices, and legal issues related to your health.

Email Catcher
Free Drug and Medical Device Case Review

Free Drug and Medical Device Case Review

Share your story with us and we will reach out to you about your case.

First
Last
Described what happened to you, we will review and reach out to you about your situation.

It is important for those who have suffered injury from dangerous drugs and medical devices to know that they have may have options.

Consumers have the ability to seek legal remedies for their injuries resulting from the negligence of drug and device manufacturers. The first step toward justice and recovery is sharing your story with effective legal counsel. An attorney will help you to better understand the issues and discuss the possibility of compensation for your suffering.

Once you complete the information request above, Drug Law Journal will send the information to a specialist at our legal sponsor’s firm, the DDP Injury Law Group, in Washington, D.C. That specialist will follow-up with you directly to gather further specific information about your case and make an evaluation. If the firm is able to move forward on your case, they will also discuss next steps. Remember – the entire consult and evaluation is free to you. You only need to take the first step to fill out the contact form or call: (800) 597-1870 for immediate assistance.