Skip to main content

Are Drug Labels Missing Information That Patients and Clinicians Need?


In a perspective in this week’s New England Journal of Medicine, Drs. Lisa Schwartz and Steven Woloshin, faculty at Dartmouth University, persuasively argue that the answer to question posed in the title is YES.

Schwartz and Woloshin note that when the FDA reviews a drug, expert reviewers consider a wealth of data about the benefits and side effects of the drug. They also raise questions, make judgments, and make statements about their degree of certainty that the benefits of the drug outweigh the risks. However, effectiveness and harm data that patients and their providers might want to see often do not make it to the drug label. Opinions of the expert reviewer, including their degree of uncertainty about the drug, would be of great interest but these virtually never make it to the label. This information is contained in FDA documents, but these voluminous documents are not practically accessible.


This article is a quick and fascinating read that has 3 fascinating examples that detail how important information is often absent from drug labels. Here are some selected examples from the article:

1) Zoledronic Acid (Zometa): This is used to treat hypercalcemia in cancer patients. FDA documents note that the mortality was higher in patients taking the 8 mg dose than the 4 mg dose. This was not on the label, nor in the journal article reporting the study.


2) Eszopiclone (Lunesta): this is for chronic insomnia. (You may have seen the inspiring television commercial in which a moth graciously puts frustrated insomniacs to sleep). The FDA review notes that users did not have clinically significant improvement in next day alertness or functioning. This would not be found on the drug label.


3) Romelteon (Rozerem): The FDA documents show that the improvement in time to fall asleep was small. There were no improvement on a number of measures such as awakenings or sleep quality. FDA memos suggest the approval decision was a close call. None of this is apparent from the drug label.

Schwartz and Woloshin have pioneered Prescription Drug Fact Boxes that feature a table including data about the benefits and harms of the drug. The FDA is deciding whether to use these boxes on drug labels. Hopefully, they will decide to use these boxes.

Comments

Alex Smith said…
Disturbing. Why doesn't this information make it on the label? I assume the pharmaceutical industry somehow supresses it. I don't know enough about how they influence the FDA. Does anyone?
Eric Widera said…
What is disturbing is the lunesta moth - I've had dreams about that thing attacking me. No wonder why patients didn't have improvement in next day alterness.

Here is a link to the example drug box on lunesta. No moth, just good infomation.
Mike Steinman said…
Schwartz and Woloshin's article only scratches the surface of the problems with medication labeling. Frankly, the package insert (which almost no one reads, anyways) is the least of the problems with how drug information is provided to patients and physicians. We have food labels that provide clear, templated information about what one is eating. Is it too much to ask to have the same for drugs, such as a simple fact sheet with key issues for consumers (e.g. major side effects for which to be vigilant, standardized dosing and frequency instructions, and so forth)?

Regarding Alex Smith's comment, drug labels are created in a process of negotiation between FDA and the drug manufacturer. There would clearly be less conflict of interest if the FDA would create the label without having to negotiate with industry about every word. Part of this would require greater funding of FDA to provide the human resources to take on such tasks. Unfortunately, previous attempts to use industry money to support FDA activities through the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) have resulted in their own conflicts of interest, whereby the FDA is beholden to industry for its funding. Thus, a better system needs to be devised to get the FDA the resources it needs to protect the public health while avoiding the conflicts of interest that have resulted in questionable decisions.
Namita Kansal said…
Fascinating to learn! thanks for sharing and it is rather scary to not have all the needed info on the labels... and the Industry-FDA wars/compromise are a revelation to me.
Dan Matlock said…
Thanks for highlighting this topic. It is always appalling to hear these things and I too have been attacked by the Lunest moth (hilarious!).

Another challenge is that the filed of decision sciences/medical communication hasn't fully agreed on the best way to communicate risk to patients. I think we are confident that absolute risks are better than relative risks but after that, it becomes more difficult and the research is mixed. How do you communicate rare but dangerous side effects in an unbiased way (one way or the other)? Also, Valerie Reyna's "fuzzy trace theory" of decision making argues that people make decisions based on the "gist" of the information rather than the "verbatim" numbers. Should these labels contain only the gist of the info? Who decides?

Obviously these drug companies need to be more honest but even honesty is hard in risk communication. Great topic.

Popular posts from this blog

Geroscience and it's Impact on the Human Healthspan: A podcast with John Newman

Ok, I'll admit it. When I hear the phrase "the biology of aging" I'm mentally preparing myself to only understand about 5% of what the presenter is going to talk about (that's on a good day).  While I have words like telomeres, sirtuins, or senolytics memorized for the boards, I've never been able to see how this applies to my clinical practice as it always feels so theoretical.  Well, today that changed for me thanks to our podcast interview with John Newman, a "geroscientist" and geriatrician here at UCSF and at the Buck Institute for Research on Aging.

In this podcast, John breaks down what geroscience is and how it impacts how we think about many age-related conditions and diseases. For example, rather than thinking about multimorbidity as the random collection of multiple different clinical problems, we can see it as an expression of the fundamental mechanisms of aging. This means, that rather than treating individuals diseases, targeting …

The Dangers of Fleet Enemas

The dangers of oral sodium phosphate preparations are fairly well known in the medical community. In 2006 the FDA issued it’s first warning that patients taking oral sodium phosphate preparations are at risk for potential for acute kidney injury. Two years later, over-the-counter preparations of these drugs were voluntarily withdrawn by the manufacturers.  Those agents still available by prescription were given black box warnings mainly due to acute phosphate nephropathy that can result in renal failure, especially in older adults. Despite all this talk of oral preparations, little was mentioned about a sodium phosphate preparation that is still available over-the-counter – the Fleet enema.

Why Oral Sodium Phosphate Preparations Are Dangerous 

Before we go into the risks of Fleet enemas, lets spend just a couple sentences on why oral sodium phosphate preparations carry significant risks. First, oral sodium phosphate preparations can cause significant fluid shifts within the colon …

Length of Stay in Nursing Homes at the End of Life

One out of every four of us will die while residing in a nursing home. For most of us, that stay in a nursing home will be brief, although this may depend upon social and demographic variables like our gender, net worth, and marital status. These are the conclusions of an important new study published in JAGS by Kelly and colleagues (many of whom are geripal contributors, including Alex Smith and Ken Covinsky).

The study authors used data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) to describe the lengths of stay of older adults who resided in nursing homes at the end of life. What they found was that out of the 8,433 study participants who died between 1992 and 2006, 27.3% of resided in a nursing home prior to their death. Most of these patients (70%) actually died in the nursing home without being transferred to another setting like a hospital.

 The length of stay data were striking:

the median length of stay in a nursing home before death was 5 months the average length of stay was l…