How Can This Happen: FDA Approves Psychiatric Drug for Children While Govt. Investigates Corruption?

Question by Ruby: How can this happen: FDA approves psychiatric drug for children while govt. investigates corruption?
see the Dept. of Justice press release

“United States Files Complaint Against Forest Laboratories for Allegedly Violating the False Claims Act, Pharmaceutical Company Allegedly Marketed Drugs for Unapproved Pediatric Use and Paid Kickbacks”
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2009/February/09-civ-163.html

to quote 1st paragraph:

“WASHINGTON – A Complaint was unsealed today in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts against a New York pharmaceutical company for alleged False Claims Act violations arising from the company’s marketing the drugs Celexa and Lexapro for unapproved pediatric use and for paying kickbacks to induce physicians to prescribe the drugs.”

and the news of the FDA approval:

“The Corruption Continues: FDA Approves Antidepressants for Children, Even After Revelations of Bribery ”

see dubya dubya dubya dot natural dot news dot com

To quote in part:

“(NaturalNews) The FDA has approved Forest Laboratories’ antidepressant Lexapro (escitalopram) for use in children and adolescents, even as the federal government and 11 states have filed a lawsuit against the company for illegally pushing the drug on kids.

The federal government has accused Forest of bribing pediatricians to prescribe Lexapro and a related drug, Celexa (citalopram), to treat depression in children, even though such use had not been approved by the FDA at the time. The government also claims that Forest concealed the results of studies showing the drugs to be no more effective than a placebo.”

“By knowingly and actively promoting these antidepressants for off-label pediatric use without disclosing the results of the negative pediatric study and by paying kickbacks, Forest caused false claims to be submitted to federal health care programs in violation of the False Claims Act,” said the federal complaint, issued on Feb. 25.


I’ll quote the rest of the Natural News article because I cannot seem to get the link posted:

“Lexapro was introduced in 2001 as a successor to Forest’s blockbuster Celexa, which lost patent protection and became available for generic replication in 2003. Both drugs are antidepressants in the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) class, and like other SSRIs have been shown to significantly increase the risk of suicidal thoughts and behaviors in children, adolescents and young adults after even short-term use.

Lexapro is the 15th biggest selling drug in the United States.”
….
“On March 20, the FDA approved Lexapro for the treatment of major depressive disorder in children between the ages of 12 and 17, based on the findings of ONLY ONE CLINICAL STUDY. Another study showed the drug to have NO MORE EFFECT THAN A PLACEBO.”

[capitalization added for emphasis]
“….

“A lot of these kinds of trials are not successful because it’s very difficult to do depression studies,” said Forest spokesman Frank Murdolo. “But we have two studies that were successful.”

The second study referenced by Murdolo was conducted on Celexa, which the FDA declined to approve for use in children. A second Celexa study found no evidence that the drug was effective.

…”
“….

The FDA also approved Lexapro as a way to maintain control of depression symptoms, even though Forest admits there is no clinical evidence for that benefit in children. The FDA argued that it was possible to extrapolate the effectiveness of the drug from adult studies.

Lexapro is only the second antidepressant to receive US approval for use in children.

According to a federal complaint however, Forest has been marketing Lexapro and Celexa to children illegally for at least nine years.
…”
“….

In 1999, the FDA asked the company to conduct two independent clinical trials into Celexa’s effectiveness in children, offering as incentive a six-month patent extension. Forest commissioned two studies — one by the Danish company Lundbeck, which initially developed the drug, and another by U.S. researcher Karen Dineen Wagner. While the Wagner study found “a statistically … significant reduction in depressive symptoms in children and adolescents” and “no serious adverse events” from the drug’s use, the Lundbeck study found that Celexa provided no benefits over the placebo. In addition, out of a total participant population of 244 in the Lundbeck study, nine more Celexa patients attempted or considered suicide compared with those taking a placebo.

For the next three years, however, Forest widely publicized the Wagner study but did not disclose the results of the Lundbeck study.

(end of article)

Best answer:

Answer by John de Witt
How it happens is complicated, even Byzantine. Begin with the fact that the vast majority of pharmaceutical research is funded by the company trying to market a drug. There simply is no alternative funding for studies to be done without the potential of bias. To avoid the possibility of money interfering with science would mean that development of new drugs would come to a screeching halt. Also, if a doctor is going to spend a good deal of time doing research and going to meetings, it isn’t unreasonable that he should be paid, or fed a meal at the meetings. Whether that constitutes a bribe is a close judgment.
Drug companies do tend to have a really annoying tendency not to publish inconclusive studies while trumping those that show positive results, even when the positives are not statistically robust. There’s really no counter except in the skepticism of the prescribing physician. That’s one reason doctors spend a lot more time than people generally realize in reading professional journals, going to meetings, and talking with colleagues.

Add your own answer in the comments!

 


 

Jack Cole, Co-Founder of LEAP 1/3 Law Enforcement Against Prohibition – Season 1- Episode 02. Original air date 11-09-06. This episode features an educating presentation from Jack Cole of LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition). We were very grateful to have several members from LEAP on our program during our first broadcasting season. Jack Cole is the executive director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, a non-profit organization composed of former and current police officers, government agents and other law enforcement agents who oppose the current War on Drugs. Jack is a retired Detective Lieutenant who worked for the New Jersey State Police for 26 years. For twelve of those years, Cole worked as an undercover narcotics officer. The cases he investigated ranged from street drug users and mid-level drug dealers in New Jersey to international “billion-dollar” drug trafficking organizations. He ended his undercover career living nearly two years in Boston and New York City, posing as a fugitive drug dealer wanted for murder, while tracking members of a terrorist organization that robbed banks, planted bombs in corporate headquarters, court-houses, police stations, and airplanes and ultimately murdered a New Jersey State Trooper. Since retiring, Jack has been active in working to reform current drug policy. His experiences as an undercover officer led him to the conclusion that the US Government’s war on drugs is unjust and steeped in racism. He contends that ending drug prohibition will be an important towards correcting social

 

'Bath salts' hit SouthCoast

Filed under: Massachusetts Drug Use

Sold as "bath salts" with names like "Bliss" and "Cloud 9," the synthetic drugs can be found online, in gas stations and in head shops, according to the American Association of Poison Control Centers. But they're not the stuff of a … He said he is …
Read more on SouthCoastToday.com

 

Health Matters: Drugged Driving A Public Health Concern

Filed under: Massachusetts Drug Use

The Office of National Drug Control Policy, the National Institute of Drug Abuse and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration have all partnered to educate Americans on the threat of Drugged Driving and have formulated a strategic response to …
Read more on Patch.com

 

Beneficiaries' drug tests could cost ma year

Filed under: Massachusetts Drug Use

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett says there's a fine line between recreational drug use and addiction. "It's about using the right professionals so they can make the decisions as to what is recreational use and addiction," she said. Ms Bennett …
Read more on 3News NZ