FDA Ignored Radiation Warnings, According to Scientists

According to new interviews with scientists at the Food and Drug Administration, the agency routinely ignored warnings by government experts about the dangers of using CT scans to screen patients for colon cancer. The move is the latest development in an internal struggle over the merits of CT scans.

Although they've held their tongues for more than a year, a group of scientists are planning to go public this week at a meeting called by the FDA to discuss better methods of protecting patients from certain radiation treatments that might be unnecessary. Since 1980, the average amount of diagnostic radiation used on a patient in their lifetime has increased sevenfold, and part of that increase is attributed to the growing popularity of CT scans, which can pack the radiation equivalent of 400 chest X-rays.

Researchers estimate that as many as 14,000 deaths annually are attributable to radiation-induced cancers, and a group of FDA scientists are determined to make their case that physicians should start reducing the number of CT scans ordered. The procedures can often be confusing for patients, too, with radiology groups pushing for CT scans but gastroenterologists opting for camera scopes. Then again, those respective groups tend to own their preferred equipment and thus lobby for its use.

One of the recently obtained internal documents shows that agency managers wanted to approve an application by General Electric to use CT scans for colon cancer screenings despite the objections of agency scientists, who wished to reject the application, which is still under review. One of the scientists opposing the application wrote that it could expose patients to "unwarranted" levels of radiation that might then lead to abdominal cancer. The deputy director of the FDA office that oversees radiological devices said that the future of CT scans and their use is anything but certain.

It's been a rough week for pharma: This internal FDA strife comes on the heels of Pfizer's loss in the lawsuit over Neurontin and the decision that it may be forced to pay $142 million in damages.

via nytimes.com

By-line:

This guest post is contributed by Kitty Holman, who writes on the topics of Nursing Degrees. She welcomes your comments at her email Id: kitty.holman20@gmail.com.