FDA study says it has attention deficit disorder
WASHINGTON -- When scientific advisers urged the Food and Drug Administration in February to put a warning about suspected heart risks on attention-deficit drugs taken by millions of children and adults, agency officials said that more clinical evidence was needed.
Now, the FDA-funded study meant to answer questions about the drugs for attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder may be halted in midstream. The reason: The agency doesn't have the money to finish it.
The threat to the study, as disclosed in documents and interviews, stems from the chronic shortchanging of the nation's drug safety program. It is one symptom of a federal agency increasingly constrained by a budget that has failed to keep up with costs. The crunch is even direr in the food division, which tries to keep tainted foodstuffs from supermarkets.
Even as concerns grow, the agency has budgeted only $1.6 million for safety studies of medications on the market, and that sum is scheduled to drop to $900,000 in the coming year. Outside specialists estimate the agency needs $20 million to $100 million a year for such studies.
Recently, three former secretaries of health and human services sounded an alarm about what they see as a dangerous squeeze on the overall FDA budget.
Tommy Thompson, who served in President Bush's first term; Donna Shalala, who served under President Clinton; and Louis Sullivan, who served under President George H.W. Bush, joined consumer and industry groups calling on the administration to substantially boost and perhaps double the agency's $1.5 billion annual budget, which has seen modest increases in recent years.
FDA officials declined to discuss the problems with funding for drug safety, saying the issue is under internal review. In a statement, the agency acknowledged that more money is needed for safety and added that funding to complete the study on ADHD ``has not yet been identified."
A special fact-finding panel of the Institute of Medicine recently put the troubles in blunt terms in a report that called for significant FDA changes. Funding for drug safety is ``especially inadequate, [and] resource limitations have hobbled the agency's ability to improve and expand this essential component of its mission," the panel concluded.
FDA officials estimate the study of ADHD medications, including such well-known brands as Ritalin and Adderall, will cost $2 million to $3 million. About $1 million has been committed to the investigation, which is being conducted by outside researchers.
By analyzing the records of thousands of individuals, the researchers will try to determine whether the medications predispose patients to heart attacks and sudden death. Most ADHD drugs are derived from powerful stimulants. They help patients concentrate, but they also raise blood pressure, a major risk factor for heart disease and stroke.
The medications, once given primarily to children, are increasingly prescribed for adults, a population more susceptible to heart problems. About 2.5 million children and 1.5 million adults now take such medications.
``If the FDA lacks the resources to complete the study of cardiovascular risks of ADHD drugs, the consequences can have a profound adverse impact on public health," said Dr. Steven Nissen, chairman of cardiovascular medicine at the Cleveland Clinic. ``The makers of these agents have no incentive to study the hazards of their own drugs. Therefore, the FDA will likely represent the only entity capable of objectively assessing the safety of the ADHD drugs."
The ADHD study is not the only example of a patchwork system. The FDA bought, at a cost of $500,000 a year, a British database that is considered a state-of-the-art tool for drug safety research. The General Practice Research Database contains complete medical records on 4 million patients that can be mined for information on reactions to drugs.
But the FDA has acknowledged that its drug safety office doesn't have enough professionals -- epidemiologists, biostatisticians, and computer programmers -- to take full advantage of the database.
Meanwhile, the 90-member drug safety office is reeling from a surge in reports filed on bad side effects of medications. The number of such adverse reports jumped from about 250,000 in 2000 to more than 450,000 in 2005. The trend reflects greater use of prescription drugs, growing awareness about their risks, and improvements in reporting.
