Perspectives: Mifepristone Is Life Saving; Making Naloxone OTC Will Make It More Impactful
Read recent commentaries about pharmaceutical and drug-cost issues.
CNN:
Medication Abortion Saved My Life
The ruling earlier this month by a Texas federal judge to suspend the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of a drug that is used frequently for medication abortions, is very personal for me. That’s because I took mifepristone years ago during a miscarriage, and it saved my life. (Roxanne Jones, 4/18)
Stat:
OTC Naloxone Needs To Be Affordable To Make A Difference
In an attempt to make naloxone more accessible amid the massive human toll of the opioid crisis, the FDA recently approved over-the-counter naloxone. Naloxone is the one solution that has remained constant through the evolving opioid crisis. (Jonathan JK Stoltman and Mishka Terplan, 4/17)
Bloomberg:
Big Drugmakers Like Merck Are Forced To Pay Up In M&A For R&D Neglect
Merck’s $200-a-share deal for a company that has yet to have a drug approved for sale represents a premium of 75% to Friday’s closing stock price. At first blush, this seems giddy, even desperate. That it barely registered with followers of health-care mergers says much about Big Pharma’s challenges. (Ed Hammond, 4/18)
Stat:
The Adderall Shortage And Supply Chain Transparency
The demand for Adderall has surged, with U.S. prescriptions rocketing to 41.4 million in 2021 — a 10.4% increase from 2020, according to IQVIA, a life sciences industry analytics provider. According to the Food and Drug Administration, the spike in demand, coupled with “intermittent manufacturing delays,” have created a national shortage. (Guadalupe Hayes-Mota, 4/14)
Los Angeles Times:
Prescribing Drugs Remotely Saves Lives. But DEA Wants To Tighten Rules
The explosion of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic has been transformative for countless patients who might otherwise be unable to access care. But the Drug Enforcement Administration is preparing to roll back telemedicine options for many essential prescriptions. It would be a dangerous move, exacerbating already gaping disparities and imperiling the most vulnerable patients. (Kate M. Nicholson and Leo Beletsky, 4/15)
