F.D.A. Panel to Reassess Hormone Therapy Warnings
Although there is no public agenda, the panel is expected to discuss whether the risks have been overstated, deterring women who might benefit.
All menopause treatments containing the hormone estrogen carry a black box warning that the medication should not be used to prevent cardiovascular disease or dementia, and that it increases the risk of strokes, blood clots and probable dementia.
The label also warns of the possibility of breast cancer.
But proponents like Dr. Makary say there's evidence that hormone therapy — approved for the treatment of symptoms like hot flashes — may prevent cognitive decline, heart disease and some cancers, in addition to conferring benefits that are not in dispute, like reducing osteoporosis-related fractures.
Dr. Makary has dismissed findings of a heightened risk of breast cancer in women who took combined estrogen and progestin, saying the research caused a 'breast cancer scare' that has deterred women from getting a useful treatment.
'There's probably no medication that improves the health outcomes of a population more than hormone replacement therapy for women who start it within 10 years of the onset of menopause,' except perhaps antibiotics, Dr. Makary said on a podcast.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
FDA names former pharmaceutical company executive to oversee US drug program
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Food and Drug Administration on Monday named a longtime pharmaceutical executive to run the agency's drug program, the latest in a string of leadership changes at the agency. FDA Commissioner Marty Makary announced that Dr. George Tidmarsh, a cancer and pediatric specialist, will direct the agency's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, which regulates the safety and effectiveness of all U.S. drugs. His appointment comes a month after the center's acting director, Dr. Jacqueline Corrigan-Curay, announced her retirement. As the agency's top drug regulator, Tidmarsh will be charged with following through on a number of commitments made by Makary and his boss, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., including reviewing the safety of the abortion pill mifepristone. The FDA is also scrutinizing certain uses of other long-established drugs, including antidepressants and hormone-replacement drugs for menopause. Tidmarsh founded and led several pharmaceutical companies, including Horizon Pharmaceuticals, maker of an anti-inflammatory medication for arthritis. He has also served as an adjunct professor at Stanford University. The FDA's drug center is the agency's largest unit, with nearly 6,000 staffers responsible for reviewing the safety and effectiveness of new drugs and monitoring the use and marketing of older drugs. About 2,000 FDA staffers have been laid off as part of widescale cuts to the federal health workforce overseen by Kennedy. More than 1,000 others have taken buyouts or early retirement, while many others are reportedly searching for new jobs. The departures have threatened basic FDA operations, including the timely review of new drugs. FDA's drug center hasn't had a permanent director since January, when Dr. Patrizia Cavazzoni stepped down days before President Donald Trump took office. Nearly all of the FDA's senior leadership positions have turned over in recent months, either due to retirements, resignations or actions by administration officials placing them on administrative leave. FDA center directors typically hold their positions for years or even decades, serving across multiple administrations, whether Republican or Democrat. In May, Makary named Dr. Vinay Prasad, a prominent critic of the FDA's COVID response, to run the agency's vaccine center. He was also named to the post of FDA chief medical officer. Prasad joined the agency after his predecessor, longtime vaccine chief Dr. Peter Marks, was forced out in March. The head of FDA's tobacco center was also forced to step down in April. A permanent replacement has not yet been named. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Matthew Perrone, The Associated Press Sign in to access your portfolio
San Francisco Chronicle
13 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
FDA names former pharmaceutical company executive to oversee US drug program
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Food and Drug Administration on Monday named a longtime pharmaceutical executive to run the agency's drug program, the latest in a string of leadership changes at the agency. FDA Commissioner Marty Makary announced that Dr. George Tidmarsh, a cancer and pediatric specialist, will direct the agency's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, which regulates the safety and effectiveness of all U.S. drugs. His appointment comes a month after the center's acting director, Dr. Jacqueline Corrigan-Curay, announced her retirement. As the agency's top drug regulator, Tidmarsh will be charged with following through on a number of commitments made by Makary and his boss, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., including reviewing the safety of the abortion pill mifepristone. The FDA is also scrutinizing certain uses of other long-established drugs, including antidepressants and hormone-replacement drugs for menopause. Tidmarsh founded and led several pharmaceutical companies, including Horizon Pharmaceuticals, maker of an anti-inflammatory medication for arthritis. He has also served as an adjunct professor at Stanford University. The FDA's drug center is the agency's largest unit, with nearly 6,000 staffers responsible for reviewing the safety and effectiveness of new drugs and monitoring the use and marketing of older drugs. About 2,000 FDA staffers have been laid off as part of widescale cuts to the federal health workforce overseen by Kennedy. More than 1,000 others have taken buyouts or early retirement, while many others are reportedly searching for new jobs. The departures have threatened basic FDA operations, including the timely review of new drugs. Nearly all of the FDA's senior leadership positions have turned over in recent months, either due to retirements, resignations or actions by administration officials placing them on administrative leave. FDA center directors typically hold their positions for years or even decades, serving across multiple administrations, whether Republican or Democrat. In May, Makary named Dr. Vinay Prasad, a prominent critic of the FDA's COVID response, to run the agency's vaccine center. He was also named to the post of FDA chief medical officer. Prasad joined the agency after his predecessor, longtime vaccine chief Dr. Peter Marks, was forced out in March. The head of FDA's tobacco center was also forced to step down in April. A permanent replacement has not yet been named. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Medscape
13 minutes ago
- Medscape
Prevention, Screening, Treatment: Impact on Cancer Deaths
This transcript has been edited for clarity. Hello. I'm Dr Maurie Markman from City of Hope, and I'd like to discuss a very important study. I think many of you may have heard about this, but it's important to emphasize what these investigators reported in terms of the impact of what we are doing in the cancer world today and, in my opinion, what the focus needs to be on in the future. The paper I'm referring to is "Estimation of Cancer Deaths Averted From Prevention, Screening, and Treatment Efforts, 1975-2020," published in JAMA Oncology . This was a very interesting effort; there was modeling done, and assumptions were made, in order to do what these investigators did. But this is, I think, very high-quality and reasonable data science. The paper outlines the assumptions made in coming to the conclusions reached by these investigators. They looked at breast, cervix, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancers — obviously, major cancers — and specifically looked at what the impact has been over the past 45 years of these three different strategies in averting deaths: prevention, screening, and actual treatment. The bottom line, as reported by these investigators, is that over this 45-year period, 5.94 million deaths have been averted in these five cancers combined, due to the efforts of countless numbers of individuals, researchers, clinicians, public health officials, government regulators, etc. It's an incredible and an enormously positive contribution to society and to individual patient health. They note, and this is a powerful message, that 8 of the 10 deaths, 80%, that had been averted were due to efforts in cancer prevention and screening. It may come as a surprise to some, but not to all, because of our often very intense focus and money spent on treatments for established and advanced cancers over the past decades. There's no intent either in this paper or by me to denigrate — in any way, shape, or form — the enormous efforts that have been made in treatment. But if you look at the question of deaths averted, the vast majority have come from prevention and screening efforts. And clearly, there's cost involved in these efforts, but far less than that associated with development of treatments. They're even more specific in this paper: Screening, according to these investigators, has been responsible for essentially all reduction in cervix cancer, which we certainly know from the enormous contributions of the Pap smear screening and now HPV screening: 25% of breast cancer deaths were averted due to screening; 56% from prostate cancer; 79% of deaths from colorectal cancer; and, of course, from lung cancer, 98% of the impacts on cancer deaths has resulted from a reduction in smoking. So, overall a tremendous impact, a positive impact. So many individuals and organizations avert deaths, but it's critical to remember the role of prevention and screening. And as we move forward to the future, as we look at the epidemic we have of obesity in this country and the concern about the risk of alcohol on the risk for cancer, it is important to remember the critical role to the present but also for the future of prevention and screening. Thank you for your attention.
