News Focus
News Focus
icon url

stockhlder101

08/18/07 10:17 AM

#68611 RE: stockhlder101 #68610

What if... The FDA REQUIRED this genetic test??

Nice!!

Inherited genes linked to toxicity of leukemia therapy

Memphis, Tennessee, May 11, 2007

Investigators at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital have discovered inherited variations in certain genes that make children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) susceptible to the toxic side effects caused by chemotherapy medications. The researchers showed that these variations, called polymorphisms, occur in specific genes known to influence pharmacodynamics (how drugs work in the body and how much drug is needed to have its intended effect).

The findings, made during a study of 240 children, are important because these side effects in ALL can be life-threatening and interrupt delivery of treatment, increasing the risk of relapse. The new insights gained in this study could help individualize ALL chemotherapy according to a patient
icon url

stockhlder101

08/18/07 11:43 AM

#68618 RE: stockhlder101 #68610

If the FDA pushes.. FDA Pushes Genetic Test Tied to Warfarin
[Doctors worry about malpractice liability if the test is not performed.]words from Dew Diligence.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118722561330199147.html

I believe it will become so.

People will also want it.
icon url

johnnyfiber

08/18/07 3:32 PM

#68627 RE: stockhlder101 #68610

excellent post, stockholder... it's happening

"It would be irresponsible and potentially harmful to suggest that testing be used, or even mentioned, in the label," said University of Washington professor Ann Wittkowsky in an interview before the FDA's decision. "It is fascinating science, but it is not yet ready for prime time."
Larry Lesko, director of the clinical pharmacology office at the FDA, says the agency has "substantial" evidence to support the new label and hopes it will improve safety by informing doctors.
Dr. Lesko is part of a larger initiative at the FDA to promote the use of genetic factors to predict how individuals will react to medicines. It's a shift for the agency, which traditionally has more of a reactive role as the regulator of the drug industry. "If the potential wasn't huge, we wouldn't be doing it," he says. "We felt we had to be more outspoken."