Thursday, May 24, 2018

Blood test may predict who is most at risk for diabetes

Blood test may predict who is most at risk for diabetes 
Lisa Rapaport
(Reuters Health) - Adding a test normally used for diabetes monitoring to employee wellness exams could identify people who don’t have the disease but are at high risk of developing it, a recent study suggests. Researchers examined data from two different types of blood sugar test for more than 34,000 participants in a U.S. employee wellness program who didn’t have diabetes. At the start of the study, they all also had fasting blood sugar in a healthy range.

Diabetes Care, online April 26, 2018
Dov Shiffman, Carmen H. Tong, Charles M. Rowland, James J. Devlin, James B. Meigs and Michael J. McPhaul
Diabetes Care 2018 Apr; dc172500. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc17-2500

Recommended reading
HCV-Infected Patients With Diabetes Improve With Direct-Acting Antiviral Therapy: Presented at AACE

Localized US Efforts to Eliminate Hepatitis C

Localized US Efforts to Eliminate Hepatitis C
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idc.2018.02.009 

The following full-text article is available for download, shared by Henry E. Chang via twitter

Download Full Article:
https://jumpshare.com/v/3435iY7I8aaJIxv9Nk3w

Elimination of Hepatitis C Virus in Australia: Laying the Foundation

The following full-text article is available for download, shared by Henry E. Chang via twitter

Elimination of Hepatitis C Virus in Australia: Laying the Foundation
Gregory J. Dore BSc, MBBS, MPH, FRACP, PhD Behzad Hajarizadeh MD, MPH, PhD

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idc.2018.02.006

INTRODUCTION
The development of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is one of the great advances in clinical medicine in recent decades. Involving simple (once daily oral dosing), tolerable, short duration (8–12weeks), and highly efficacious (cure rates of >95%) regimens, DAA therapy has the potential to markedly increase HCV treatment uptake and turn around the escalating global disease burden associated with chronic HCV infection.1 The transformative nature of DAA therapy underpinned the development of World Health Organization(WHO) goals to eliminate HCV as a public health threat, which include 80% of eligible patients treated, a 65% decrease in HCV-related mortality, and an 80% decrease in new HCV infections by 2030.

KEY POINTS
-Australia has laid the foundation for hepatitis C virus elimination within the next decade.
-Key aspects of this foundation include high levels of screening and diagnosis, unrestricted access to direct-acting antiviral therapy, a diverse range of models of care, and high coverage of harm reduction strategies.
-Key features include government risk-sharing arrangement with the pharmaceutical companies, minimal out-of-pocket cost, no restrictions based on liver disease stage or drug/ alcohol use, prescribing authorization for all registered medical practitioners; and retreatment is allowed.
-Although initial uptake of direct-acting antiviral therapy was high, more efforts are required to continue the momentum.
-An hepatitis C virus elimination monitoring and evaluation program is in progress to inform further strategies required to achieve hepatitis C virus elimination targets

Article: https://jumpshare.com/v/Iu5mE4qtidIUDyEpjMz2

With highest hepatitis C mortality rate in U.S., Oregon expands access to life-saving drugs

PBS News Hour
May 23, 2018

Watch the program

With highest hepatitis C mortality rate in U.S., Oregon expands access to life-saving drugs
New drugs can cure up to 95 percent of patients with hepatitis C, a virus that can be debilitating or deadly. And there’s been a 20 percent rise in new infections from 2015 to 2016 due to the opioid epidemic. In Oregon, a state hard-hit by the disease, new medicines combined with the big surge in those looking for treatment has led to a unique care model. Special correspondent Cat Wise reports.

Full Transcript 
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/with-highest-hepatitis-c-mortality-rate-in-u-s-oregon-expands-access-to-life-saving-drugs

Judy Woodruff: Now the latest on a medical breakthrough that’s starting to have an impact on a hidden, deadly epidemic in this country. New drugs can cure up to 95 percent of patients with hepatitis C, a virus that often leads to debilitating or deadly results. The drugs can save lives, prevent expensive hospitalizations and liver transplants. But some states are feeling the squeeze of the cost of this medicine. Special correspondent Cat Wise has our report for our weekly series on the Leading Edge of science.

Cat Wise: Three-point-five million Americans are living with a potentially deadly virus, and half don’t even know it. It’s hepatitis C, a blood-borne pathogen which attacks the liver and can eventually cause serious liver problems, including cirrhosis and liver cancer. Three-quarters of those with the virus are baby boomers, exposed from unscreened blood transfusions, I.V. drug use, and other blood-to-blood contact prior to the early ’90s. But now the opioid epidemic has led to a 20 percent rise in new infections from 2015 to 2016. One state where the young and the old have been hit hard by the disease is Oregon. Oregon has the highest hepatitis C mortality rate, per capita, in the country. It’s estimated about 100,000 Oregonians have been infected with the virus and more than 500 die every year. It’s been a very difficult disease to treat, but over the last four years, there’s been a revolution in hep C drugs. Many are being cured around the country now, and here in Oregon, many are coming here to the Oregon Clinic for those treatments.

Dr. Kent Benner: We never talked about cure of hep C until the last few years, and now we’re all talking about cure of hep C.

Cat Wise: Dr. Kent Benner is a gastroenterologist and hepatologist at the clinic in Portland. He says people are still dying from the disease, often because they haven’t been tested and aren’t aware they have virus until they are quite sick. But Benner says much has changed since he first started treating patients several decades ago.

Dr. Kent Benner: Treatment at that time was interferon. This required injections, shots several times a week. Quite a few side effects. We felt we were doing well if we could cure 15 or 20 percent of patients. Since late 2013, there’s been a remarkable development from a number of different companies. They have developed drug combinations that provide 95 percent cure rates in patients we treat.

Cat Wise: Costly liver transplants are often the only option when the liver becomes too badly damaged. But at earlier disease stages, the liver often starts to heal once the medicines have cleared virus from the body.

Dr. Kent Benner: Not only are we seeing liver function improve, but patients with more advanced liver disease occasionally can come off the transplant list.

Cat Wise: Sixty-four-year-old Rob Shinney, who recently had knee surgery, is one of those cured by the new hep C drugs known as direct-acting antivirals, or DAAs. Like many others of his generation, he doesn’t really know how he contracted the virus. Under the care of Dr. Benner, Shinney began a three-month treatment in late 2016 after his liver showed signs of moderate scarring known as fibrosis. Tests later confirmed he was virus-free.

Rob Shinney: I had a serious chronic illness hanging over my head that I knew could kill me. And that’s gone now.

Cat Wise: We spoke at a local pub he visits now and again with his choir friends, something he never did when he had the virus.

Rob Shinney: I swear I felt like I was 20 years younger. I had energy. I could do things. It’s great just to be able to sit around and have a beer with everybody and, you know, just enjoy life. Cat Wise: The cost of the drugs used to cure Shinney, who has private insurance, aren’t cheap. Since Gilead Sciences’ Sovaldi first hit the market in late 2013 at a whopping $84,000 for a course of therapy, competitors have steadily lowered the costs. Last year, a new medication called Mavyret was released for around $26,000. Many payers often, though, negotiate even lower prices with the drug company. Still, the drugs are expensive, and they aren’t a vaccine. If someone is cured, they can become reinfected. Access to the drugs varies widely around the country. A report last year by two national advocacy organizations found that many public and private payers choose to limit access to DAAs due to their cost, as well as other concerns. Oregon is among a number of states which have had restrictive Medicaid requirements, including denying coverage to patients in the early stages of disease and those who are abusing drugs and alcohol. But some of those restrictions are beginning to ease.

Dr. Dana Hargunani: In January, we just started covering individuals with lower stages or lower levels of fibrosis.

Cat Wise: Dr. Dana Hargunani is the chief medical officer for the Oregon Health Authority, which oversees the state’s Medicaid program. She says, while the state is starting to expand access, costs are still a significant issue. Oregon has spent more than $94 million on the drugs since 2014, covering about 1,500 people.

Dr. Dana Hargunani: The newer treatments for hepatitis C have a significant budget impact for our state. We had to get additional funding through the legislative process. We’re trying to manage our limited resources to ensure coverage for those who need it immediately for the hepatitis C treatment, as well as all the other individuals in our Medicaid program.

Cat Wise: Hargunani says another reason the state delays coverage until patients have mild liver scarring, not everyone needs the medicines.

Dr. Dana Hargunani: One in five individuals who get infected with hepatitis C will spontaneously clear their infection. Right now, the data doesn’t help us understand how to know which individuals will need to have a high-cost drug to treat and cure their infection.

Dr. Brianna Sustersic: Luckily, he doesn’t have any evidence of cirrhosis.

Cat Wise: Dr. Brianna Sustersic is a medical director at Central City Concern, a federally funded health center in downtown Portland which serves a large number of homeless individuals, many of whom have substance abuse disorders; 25 percent to 50 percent of the patients have hep C.

Dr. Brianna Sustersic: The Medicaid requirements have limited access to treatment for many of our patients. From a public health standpoint, if we are able to treat the population who is contracting this, and spreading it, then we can move toward eradicating the disease.

Cat Wise: To prove that point, and to meet a big need, the clinic and a local syringe exchange program began a small drug company-sponsored study last year to treat patients who otherwise wouldn’t have qualified for the medications; 56-year-old Kim Trano is now virus-free thanks to that trial. She says she’s felt a lot of stigma being a recovering drug user and it was hard to learn she had initially been denied drug coverage. To those who would question giving expensive medicines to someone who might become reinfected, she says:

Kim Trano: Everyone is worthy of a chance. If I were to relapse, I would all precautions not to be reinfected. And that’s pretty easy to do. Most people know how to do that.

Cat Wise: The new medicines combined with the big surge in those looking for treatment has led to a unique care model. Chris Hulstein is not a doctor. He’s a clinical pharmacist and part of a new program at Portland’s Providence Hospital. Over the past year, about 50 patients have been successfully treated by Hulstein and his colleagues. Another 30 are currently in treatment.

Chris Hulstein: A lot of the specialists are very busy managing very complex patients, and that is their role. Having a pharmacist being able to manage the patient gets patients treated faster and more successfully than we ever have been able to do before.

Cat Wise: Hepatitis C advocates are now working with the state and private insurers to open up more access to the drugs. For the “PBS NewsHour,” I’m Cat Wise in Portland, Oregon.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/with-highest-hepatitis-c-mortality-rate-in-u-s-oregon-expands-access-to-life-saving-drugs

Wednesday, May 23, 2018

HCV-Infected Patients With Diabetes Improve With Direct-Acting Antiviral Therapy: Presented at AACE

FirstWord Pharma

HCV-Infected Patients With Diabetes Improve With Direct-Acting Antiviral Therapy: Presented at AACE
By Michael Bassett
BOSTON -- May 22, 2018 -- Treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients who have diabetes with direct-acting antiviral therapy results in significant and durable improvement in their diabetes, according to study presented here at the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 27th Annual Scientific & Clinical Congress (AACE)...

Although 66% of the patients had no improvement in diabetes with HCV eradication, 10% of the patients showed improvement but not sustained, and 24% experienced sustained improvement...

Drugmakers Blamed For Blocking Generics Have Jacked Up Prices And Cost U.S. Billions

Drugmakers Blamed For Blocking Generics Have Jacked Up Prices And Cost U.S. Billions
May 23, 2018
Sydney Lupkin, Kaiser Health News

Makers of brand-name drugs called out by the Trump administration for potentially stalling generic competition have hiked their prices by double-digit percentages since 2012 and cost Medicare and Medicaid nearly $12 billion in 2016, a Kaiser Health News analysis has found.

As part of President Donald Trump’s promise to curb high drug prices, the Food and Drug Administration posted a list of pharmaceutical companies that makers of generics allege refused to let them buy the drug samples needed to develop their products. For approval, the FDA requires so-called bioequivalence testing using samples to demonstrate that generics are the same as their branded counterparts.

The analysis shows that drug companies that may have engaged in what FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb called “shenanigans” to delay the entrance of cheaper competitors onto the market have indeed raised prices and cost taxpayers more money over time.

The FDA listed more than 50 drugs whose manufacturers have withheld or refused to sell samples, and cited 164 inquiries for help obtaining them. Thirteen of these pleas from makers of generics pertained to Celgene’s blockbuster cancer drug Revlimid, which accounted for 63 percent of Celgene’s revenue in the first quarter of 2018, according to a company press release.

The brand-name drug companies “wouldn’t put so much effort into fighting off competition if these weren’t [such] lucrative sources of revenue,” said Harvard Medical School instructor Ameet Sarpatwari. “In the case of a blockbuster drug, that can be hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue for the brand-name drugs and almost the same cost to the health care system.”

Indeed, a KHN analysis found that 47 of the drugs cost Medicare and Medicaid almost $12 billion in 2016. The spending totals don’t include rebates, which drugmakers return to the government after paying for the drugs upfront but are not public. The rebates ranged from 9.5 percent to 26.3 percent for Medicare Part D in 2014, the most recent year that data are available.

The remaining drugs do not appear in the Medicare and Medicaid data.

By delaying development of generics, drugmakers can maintain their monopolies and keep prices high. Most of the drugs cost Medicare Part D more in 2016 than they did in 2012, for an average spending increase of about 60 percent more per unit. This excludes drugs that don’t appear in the 2012 Medicare Part D data.

Revlimid cost Medicare Part D $2.7 billion in 2016, trailing only Harvoni, which treats hepatitis C and is not on the FDA’s new list. The cost of Revlimid, which faces no competition from generics, has jumped 40 percent per unit in just four years, the Medicare data show, and cost $75,200 per beneficiary in 2016.

Some drugs on the FDA’s list, including Celgene’s, are part of a safety program that can require restricted distribution of brand-name drugs that have serious risks or addictive qualities. Drugmakers with products in the safety program sometimes say they can’t provide samples unless the generics manufacturer jumps through a series of hoops “that generic companies find hard or impossible to comply with,” Gottlieb said in a statement.

The Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General issued a report in 2013 that said the FDA couldn’t prove that the program actually improved safety, and Sarpatwari said there’s evidence drugmakers are abusing it to stave off competition from generics.

Gottlieb said the FDA will be notifying the Federal Trade Commission about pleas for help from would-be generics manufacturers about obtaining samples, and he encouraged the manufacturers to do the same if they suspect they’re being thwarted by anticompetitive practices.

Celgene spokesman Greg Geissman said the company has sold samples to generics manufacturers and will continue to do so. He stressed maintaining a balance of innovation, generic competition and safety.

“Even a single dose of thalidomide, the active ingredient in Thalomid, can cause irreversible, debilitating birth defects if not properly handled and dispensed. Revlimid and Pomalyst are believed to have similar risks,” Geissman said.

The highest number of pleas for help related to Actelion Pharmaceuticals’ pulmonary hypertension drug Tracleer. In 2016, that drug cost Medicare $90,700 per patient and more than $304 million overall. Meanwhile, spending per unit jumped 52 percent from 2012 through 2016.

Actelion was acquired by Johnson & Johnson’s pharmaceutical arm, Janssen, in 2017.

Actelion spokeswoman Colleen Wilson said that the company “cooperate[s]” with makers of generic drugs and “has responded to all requests it has received directly from generic manufacturers seeking access to its medications for bioequivalence testing.”

PhRMA, the trade group for makers of brand-name pharmaceuticals, said the FDA’s list was somewhat unfair because it lacked context and responses from those it represents.

“While we must continue to foster a competitive marketplace, PhRMA is concerned that FDA’s release of the ‘inquiries’ it has received lacks proper context and conflates a number of divergent scenarios,” said PhRMA spokesman Andrew Powaleny.

Congress is considering the CREATES Act, which stands for “Creating and Restoring Equal Access to Equivalent Samples” and would foster competition in part by allowing generics manufacturers to sue brand-name drug manufacturers to compel them to provide samples.

The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), said more transparency from the FDA is helpful, but more work from the agency is needed to end the anticompetitive tactic. “With billions of dollars at stake, a database alone will not stop this behavior,” Leahy said.

Co-sponsor Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, expressed similar sentiments, telling KHN: “The CREATES Act is necessary because it would serve as a strong deterrent to pharmaceutical companies that engage in anticompetitive practices to keep low-cost generic drugs off the market.”

The FDA hasn’t come out in support of CREATES. “They should know that this is going to require a legislative solution,” Sarpatwari said. “Why are they not stepping into this arena and saying that?”

https://khn.org/news/drugmakers-blamed-for-blocking-generics-have-milked-prices-and-cost-u-s-billions/

This article was reprinted from khn.org with permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Kaiser Health News, an editorially independent news service, is a program of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care policy research organization unaffiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

Tuesday, May 22, 2018

More patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis receiving liver transplants

More patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis receiving liver transplants
Medical centers willing to perform transplants without mandated six-month wait

Washington, DC (May 22, 2018) -- Increasingly, liver transplant centers are changing a long-standing practice of delaying potentially life-saving liver transplantation for patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis until after they stopped drinking alcohol for six months, according to a new study scheduled for presentation at Digestive Disease Week® (DDW) 2018.

Study implications
"Liver transplant for severe alcoholic hepatitis is being increasingly accepted, with positive outcomes, and the hope is that more and more patients will be evaluated for transplants," said Saroja Bangaru, MD, chief resident in internal medicine at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, and co-author of the study. "The hope is that survival rates are encouraging enough for centers, so that even more of them will reverse past practices."

Severe alcoholic hepatitis has an extremely high mortality rate. The primary treatment option has been the use of steroids, predominantly prednisolone. But, many patients do not respond to steroids, and a significant percentage of them will die within three months.

Historically, centers would not perform transplants until patients had stopped drinking for six months due to concerns about a return to drinking after transplant. Additionally, there was a perceived high risk that patient's continued drinking would cause them to miss medical appointments and failure to take their immunosuppressant medications, which prevent organ rejection, all of which could contribute to transplant failure.

Only in recent years have limited studies begun to show greater success for transplants for severe alcoholic hepatitis, Bangaru said. These studies have also shown that a variety of other factors -- aside from recent drinking -- influence whether a patient relapses. These include whether the patient has good social support, suffers from psychiatric ailments and accepts that they have an alcohol problem. "These studies suggest that predicting risk of relapse is much more complicated than just duration of abstinence," Bangaru said.

Study design and results
Researchers gathered data from 45 transplant centers, of which 23 said they were now performing such transplants. Among those, 17 centers reported that patients had a one-year survival rate of more than 90 percent, which is higher than that reported in several previous studies.

The survey found that centers have become more willing to perform transplants, as long as patients are carefully screened. Researchers reported that centers use highly selective criteria in approving candidates for transplant, assessing their medical history, social support system and whether they have additional health problems, particularly psychiatric disorders.

"If patients are selected well, according to these criteria, it allows for the excellent survival that we are seeing post-transplant," Bangaru said. Past policy has done a disservice to those patients who were previously unaware that they had liver disease. "Some patients come in for the first time with severe alcoholic hepatitis, and no one has ever told them to stop drinking. Because they are not eligible for transplant, they have a really high mortality rate."

The survey also concluded that most transplant centers had "inadequate" post-transplant support for patients. While most offered the services of social workers, only a limited number provided psychiatric or group therapy support that could be very important in helping patients avoid relapse and further medical problems.

Next steps
Dr. Bangaru said further study is needed to encourage more transplants, in particular a controlled clinical trial that follows survival rates over one, three and five years, along with an assessment of rates of alcoholic relapse.

DDW presentation details
Dr. Saroja Bangaru will present data from the study, "Increased use of liver transplantation as therapeutic option for severe alcoholic hepatitis," abstract Sa1457, on Saturday, June 2, at noon EDT. For more information about featured studies, as well as a schedule of availability for featured researchers, please visit http://www.ddw.org/press.

Digestive Disease Week® (DDW) is the largest international gathering of physicians, researchers and academics in the fields of gastroenterology, hepatology, endoscopy and gastrointestinal surgery. Jointly sponsored by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) and the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT), DDW takes place June 2-5 at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center in Washington, DC. The meeting showcases more than 5,000 abstracts and hundreds of lectures on the latest advances in GI research, medicine and technology. 
More information can be found at http://www.ddw.org.
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2018-05/ddw-mpw051818.php

FDA warns companies selling illegal, unapproved kratom products marketed for opioid cessation, pain treatment and other medical uses

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued warning letters to three marketers and distributors of kratom products – Front Range Kratom of Aurora, Colorado; Kratom Spot of Irvine, California and Revibe, Inc., of Kansas City, Missouri – for illegally selling unapproved kratom-containing drug products with unproven claims about their ability to help in the treatment of opioid addiction and withdrawal. The companies also make claims about treating pain, as well as other medical conditions like lowering blood pressure, treating cancer and reducing neuron damage caused by strokes.
“Despite our warnings that no kratom product is safe, we continue to find companies selling kratom and doing so with deceptive medical claims for which there’s no reliable scientific proof to support their use,” said FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D. “As we work to combat the opioid epidemic, we cannot allow unscrupulous vendors to take advantage of consumers by selling products with unsubstantiated claims that they can treat opioid addiction. Far from treating addiction, we’ve determined that kratom is an opioid analogue that may actually contribute to the opioid epidemic and puts patients at risk of serious side effects. If people believe that the active ingredients in kratom have drug-like effects that can treat pain or addiction, then the FDA is open to reviewing that data under our new drug approval process. In the meantime, I promised earlier this year that the FDA would step up our actions against unapproved and unsafe products that are being deceptively marketed for the treatment of opioid addiction and withdrawal symptoms. At the same time, we also promised to make the approval process more efficient for novel, safe and effective medical treatments aimed at the treatment of addiction; and to help more people suffering from addiction get access to approved therapies. In fulfilling these commitments, we’ll continue to take enforcement actions against unscrupulous products to protect the public health.”
The FDA continues to warn consumers not to use Mitragyna speciosa, commonly known as kratom, a plant which grows naturally in Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. The FDA is concerned that kratom, which affects the same opioid brain receptors as morphine, appears to have properties that expose users to the risks of addiction, abuse and dependence. There are no FDA-approved uses for kratom, and the agency has received concerning reports about the safety of kratom.
The FDA is actively evaluating all available scientific information on this issue and continues to warn consumers not to use any products labeled as containing the botanical substance kratom or its psychoactive compounds, mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine. The FDA encourages more research to better understand kratom’s safety profile, including the use of kratom combined with other drugs.
The companies receiving warning letters use websites where they take orders for kratom products or they use social media to make unproven claims about the ability of their kratom drug products to cure, treat, or prevent a disease, which is against the law. Examples of claims being made by these companies include:
  • “Along with helping drug addiction, the health benefits of kratom leaves include their ability to lower blood pressure, relieve pain, boost metabolism, increase sexual energy, improve the immune system, prevent diabetes, ease anxiety, eliminate stress, and induce healthy sleep.”
  • “The mood elevation qualities of kratom reduces opiate withdrawal effects.”
  • “Kratom, like any other pain killer, relieves temporary or even chronic pain.”
  • “This plant can relieve headaches, vascular pain, arthritic pain, muscle pain among others.”
  • “Kratom can be used as a remedy for stroke-related ailments and condition as it is a powerful antioxidant that works to reduce neuron damage.”
  • “It can . . . help in lowering blood pressure.”
  • “Kratom is also said to have elements that control blood sugar level in the body for diabetic patients.”
  • “It is said, that kratom is very effective against cancer.”
Health fraud scams like these can pose serious health risks. These products have not been demonstrated to be safe or effective and may keep some patients from seeking appropriate, FDA-approved therapies. Selling these unapproved products with claims that they can treat opioid addiction and withdrawal and treat other serious medical conditions is a violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
Reducing the number of Americans who are addicted to opioids and cutting the rate of new addiction is one of the FDA’s highest priorities. This work includes promoting more widespread innovation and access to opioid addiction treatments for the more than 2 million of Americans with an opioid use disorder. The FDA is taking new steps to make safe and effective medication assisted treatments (MAT) available to those who suffer from opioid use disorder and to reduce the stigma that is sometimes associated with use of these therapies. Using products with unsubstantiated claims may prevent those addicted to opioids from seeking treatments that have been demonstrated to be safe and effective. Reliance on products with unsubstantiated claims may delay their path to recovery and put them at greater risk of addiction, overdose and death. In fact, patients receiving FDA-approved medication-assisted treatment cut their risk of death in half, according to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
The warning letters included more than 65 kratom products. Some of these products include:
Front Range Kratom:
  • “Maeng Da Red Vein Powder”
  • “Maeng Da White Vein Capsules”
  • “Liquid Kratom Red Maeng Da Enhanced Pain Formulation”
  • “Bali White Vein Kratom Powder”
  • “Bali Green Vein Powder”
  • “Maeng Da White Energizing Formula”
Kratom Spot:
  • “Red Thai Kratom Powder”
  • “Indo White Vein Kratom Powder”
  • “Borneo White Vein Kratom Powder”
  • “Green Malay Kratom Powder”
  • “Super Green Indo Kratom Capsules”
  • “Ultra Enhanced Malay Kratom Powder”
  • “Kratom Extract 8x Kratom Powder”
Revibe:
  • “50x Black Diamond Extract”
  • “Green Horn Kratom”
  • “Green Indo”
  • “Green Sumatra,” “Lucky 7”
  • “Red Borneo”
  • “Super Elephant”
  • “White Sumatra”
  • “Yellow Vietnam Kratom”
The FDA requested responses from each of the companies within 15 working days. The companies are directed to inform the agency of the specific actions taken to address each of the agency’s concerns. The warning letters also state that failure to correct violations may result in law enforcement action such as seizure or injunction.
Previous FDA testing also confirmed salmonella contamination in kratom products distributed by Revibe. On March 26, 2018, the FDA contacted Revibe regarding a recall of all Revibe kratom containing products that may be contaminated with salmonella. On April 3, 2018, the agency oversaw the destruction of products at Revibe’s facility, but, as of April 19, 2018, the company has not provided the FDA information to confirm that they have recalled the products it distributed. The FDA reminds consumers of the risks and urges them not to use these or any other kratom products.
Health care professionals and consumers are encouraged to report any adverse events related to these products to the FDA’s MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting program. To file a report, use the MedWatch Online Voluntary Reporting Form. The completed form can be submitted online or via fax to 800-FDA-0178.
The FDA, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, promotes and protects the public health by, among other things, assuring the safety, effectiveness, and security of human and veterinary drugs, vaccines and other biological products for human use, and medical devices. The agency also is responsible for the safety and security of our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, dietary supplements, products that give off electronic radiation, and for regulating tobacco products.
https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm608447.htm