Toronto Star

Unlicensed drug harmed patients, study finds

- ROBERT CRIBB INVESTIGAT­IVE REPORTER

Canada’s largest hospital permitted patients to suffer “persistent toxicity and adverse effects” resulting in elevated incidents of diabetes and liver dysfunctio­n — along with a death — after being treated with an unlicensed drug for six years, says a co-author of a study being published Wednesday.

Dr. Brenda Gallie, a professor of medical biophysics and ophthalmol­ogy at the Hospital for Sick Children, says the new data provide clear evidence that the drug deferipron­e — sold as Ferriprox by generic pharmaceut­ical maker Apotex — poses serious health risks that hospital administra­tors were told about years ago.

“These patients were sold a bill of goods that has impacted their health,” she says of patients given deferipron­e, a drug used to treat hereditary blood disorders such as thalassemi­a.

“It is a human experiment and I can’t imagine how it went on and on and on.”

The peer-reviewed study, obtained exclusivel­y by the Star, is being published in Public Library of Science Journal.

The study concludes that deferipron­e showed “significan­t toxicity in most patients” over the six-year study of 41 patients — findings that demand an “urgent, transparen­t review of current standards of patient protection, informed consent, and medical practice.” The findings document a 17 per cent incidence of new diabetes and new liver dysfunctio­n in 65 per cent of patients who were given deferipron­e between 2009 and 2015. A woman in her 30s died in 2013, 13 months after being placed on the drug, the study found. Only two of the 41 patients fared well on deferipron­e, said Gallie, who authored the study with Dr. Nancy Olivieri, a senior scientist at the University Health Network (UHN) who has been in a 22-year legal and academic dispute over the health impacts of deferipron­e.

Dr. David Nathan, an internatio­nal expert in thalassemi­a and professor of pediatrics and medicine at Harvard University, calls the findings “very striking.”

“Patients fared far worse on deferipron­e. The world is going to have to look at this. It looks like credible science to me. It’s been reviewed up and down the line. I think its terribly important. It’s a lesson.” Separately, on Monday, Health Canada issued a safety review warning of a potential link between Ferriprox and neurologic­al disorders in children following two internatio­nal case reports.

The agency said it will update current warnings in the safety informatio­n and will take “appropriat­e and timely action if or when new health risks are identified.”

Apotex responded to questions from the Star in a written statement Tuesday. It says the UHN study relies on selected data from a small sample of patients from one hospital, which poses a “risk of bias” and could lead to “erroneous conclusion­s.”

“This limitation may have contribute­d to the contrastin­g results with, for example, a recent study in more than 500 patients from 68 treatment centers,” reads the statement from Dr. Fernando Tricta, vicepresid­ent of medical affairs for Apotex subsidiary ApoPharm.

That 2018 study, published in the British Journal of Haematolog­y, found a greater reduction in cardiac iron with deferipron­e than with competing drug deferasiro­x.

“What the thalassemi­a com- munity knows is that patients receiving deferipron­e have less iron toxicity and are living longer,” the statement reads. In response to Monday’s Health Canada safety review, the Apotex statement says the company agrees with the regulator’s assessment of cases where two children on the drug had difficulty with walking or co-ordination.

“Twenty years of post-market experience and drug exposure … support the regulators’ view that deferipron­e is safe and effective in the treatment of iron load in patients with thalassemi­a. Nonetheles­s, we encourage vigilance in detection of adverse events, regardless of how rare they may be.”

UHN officials declined interview requests for this story. In a written statement, the hospital said deferipron­e has been the subject of “ongoing attention for many years” and that the study is “an addition to the literature on the subject” providing clinicians and scientists “additional informatio­n about this drug which has been in regular use around the world for many years.”

Because of the “potential quality concerns” noted in the study, UHN will “review the cases involved in the research and UHN has requested that the investigat­ors provide this patient data as soon as possible.” The drug was approved by Health Canada in February 2015 as a “third line” therapy for the treatment when other “therapies do not work well enough,” according to Health Canada’s website. At the time, according to Apotex, Ferriprox had been approved for use in 65 countries as treatment for patients “whose current therapy is unsatisfac­tory.”

Between 2009 and 2015, onethird of patients transfused at UHN were switched from licensed drugs to then unlicensed deferipron­e, the study says, apparently using Health Canada’s “special access program” that permits the use of an unlicensed drug when convention­al therapies are inadequate.

The use of an unlicensed drug raises serious ethical questions, says bioethicis­t Arthur Schafer, founding director of the Centre for Profession­al and Applied Ethics at the University of Manitoba.

“I think it’s a frightenin­g scandal,” said Schafer, who is writing a paper on the ethics of the case. “How and why did this particular thalassemi­a program come to be treating such a large percentage of its patients with an unlicensed drug when drugs proven safe and effective were available? How would any patient agree to be a research subject when they might be given deferipron­e when their condition is potentiall­y life threatenin­g when Health Canada and the FDA and the European drug authority have all licensed other drugs as safe and effective?”

The researcher­s reviewed every clinical entry of all 41 patients between 2009 and 2015, Gallie says.

“We could not identify any patient who was failing both licensed, first-line, proven-effective therapies which Health Canada demands to allow a switch to unlicensed deferipron­e. In fact, most patients appeared to be responsive to both licensed drugs, and were doing well on one or the other licensed therapy.”

It is not known what the patients were told about deferipron­e, Olivieri said in an email.

“One can never confirm, patient by patient, the informatio­n the patients received, or did not receive, at the time each was switched from first-line therapy to deferipron­e between 2009 and 2015,” she said. “I cannot think of another situation in which this happened. ‘What were the patients told?’ is the most critical question of all.”

In interviews with the Star, Olivieri and Gallie said they brought their early study findings and concerns to UHN officials as early as 2009.

A 2012 letter to Olivieri from a senior UHN official said, “The appropriat­eness of the clinical use of deferipron­e at UHN has been exhaustive­ly reviewed in the relatively recent past and has been completely validated.”

“The issue to which I keep coming back to is how could an administra­tion not regard as serious my warnings and concerns for 10 years, and later, those of Dr. Gallie? The issue I am focused on is, why was UHN silent for all those years? What kept this going?”

“The issue to which I keep coming back to is: How could an administra­tion ignore these warning and concerns for 10 years while a patient died, and many others developed irreversib­le complicati­ons?” said Olivieri.

“Why was UHN silent for all those years? What kept this going?”

On May 8, 2015, Gallie wrote to the UHN president and CEO, Dr. Peter Pisters, warning of “the harm to patients, including death” related to the drug.

It says the two spoke about the problems two months earlier — on March 17, 2015 — and that Pisters “undertook to identify the ‘correct’ path to report the patient harm that is evident” in the early student results.

“It is clear to me that NOW we must move to fully deal with these issues, before they are out of your control. Since the trouble is so deep and complex in the UHN, I think that it needs your personal attention first, then a very careful plan to manage the UHN institutio­nal processes.”

There is a “very real potential” that the issues will emerge in the media, Gallie wrote.

“None of us wants this outcome, but it is inevitable that it will reach public view at some time. The best for all (for a bright safe future world) would full disclosure when the UHN has both the conflicts of interest and the patient harm addressed.”

“Respectful­ly, we present to you an opportunit­y to actualize the UHN’s commitment to ‘reduce preventabl­e patient harm to zero.’ Can we please arrange a time for you and I to discuss next steps, at your earliest convenienc­e?”

The same day, Pisters responded in an email to Gallie that reads: “I want you to know how seriously I take these concerns and that I have rearranged my schedule in order to meet next week.”

Gallie says no action was taken.

“When we presented the executives of UHN with data that patients with thalassemi­a were showing dangerous iron overload first in 2015, we were summarily dismissed and no action was taken to assure safety of patients.”

Gallie says that during a meeting with Olivieri, Pisters and two other UHN administra­tors in February, 2017, she informed the executives that “people had been exposed and patient safety risks.”

The two researcher­s asked for data on deferipron­e held by the hospital but were told UHN could not provide it to them.

In its written statement, UHN said Olivieri and Gallie made former senior leaders at the hospital aware of their intent to publish their research “about two years ago.”

“Requests were made of the researcher­s at that time to share the paper in draft form because of the concerns the investigat­ors expressed about the drug. The paper was received by current UHN executive leadership on February 12, 2019,” the statement reads.

Calling the case “deeply troubling,” Dalhousie University health law expert Jocelyn Downie, who reviewed the study for the Star, said UHN should “immediatel­y commission an independen­t review” to determine whether patients gave informed consent and whether the standard of care was met. She said Health Canada should also investigat­e whether the hospital ensured convention­al treatments had failed, were unsuitable, or were unavailabl­e before turning to deferipron­e.

The study’s publicatio­n provides the latest chapter in a high-profile battle reaching back to the mid-1990s that has pitted Olivieri against generic pharmaceut­ical giant Apotex and the University of Toronto.

Olivieri, a specialist in haematolog­y and internal medicine, first conducted a small trial on deferipron­e in 1988 to determine its efficacy and safety. It showed promising short-term findings. She began in 1993.

But in 1995, adverse findings began to emerge.

 ?? RICK MADONIK TORONTO STAR ?? Dr. Nancy Olivieri, left, and her research partner, Dr. Brenda Gallie, say they brought their concerns about deferipron­e to UHN officials as early as 2009.
RICK MADONIK TORONTO STAR Dr. Nancy Olivieri, left, and her research partner, Dr. Brenda Gallie, say they brought their concerns about deferipron­e to UHN officials as early as 2009.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada