Amid contradictory laws, hospitals in one state were unable to explain policies on emergency abortion care, study finds | CNN



CNN
 — 

Oklahoma’s laws restricting abortions have created a confusing, contradictory environment that may have a chilling effect on health care, new research says.

After the US Supreme Court overturned the right to an abortion last year with the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, several states quickly passed laws that restricted such procedures. A report released Tuesday and described in the medical journal the Lancet finds that the laws in at least one state left workers at many hospitals confused about how to proceed.

When the court made its decision, the Oklahoma law that criminalized abortion in 1910 went back into effect, according to the state’s attorney general. Lawmakers then created multiple overlapping laws that further criminalized abortion and increased penalties for those who performed or assisted in an abortion procedure, according to the new report from Physicians for Human Rights, Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice and the Center for Reproductive Rights.

The Oklahoma laws allow abortion in the case of a medical emergency, but one doesn’t define a medical emergency. Another says it allows for the “preservation of life in a medical emergency,” defined as causing “substantial and irreversible body of bodily impairment” – which is not a medical term, experts say.

To understand exactly how well Oklahoma hospitals understood the laws, the researchers used a “secret shopper method,” study co-author Dr. Michele Heisler said.

Researchers posed as prospective patients and called 34 hospitals to ask about the emergency pregnancy care they offered.

Heisler said that when the researchers designed the study, she expected the hospitals to tell the patients that they could get help in an emergency but that a second provider might have to sign off on an abortion or that a doctor would have to get the decision past an “onerous” hospital oversight committee.

“What we weren’t expecting is that there would be so much confusion and contradictory information and really not clear information,” said Heisler, who is medical director at Physicians for Human Rights and a professor of internal medicine and public health at the University of Michigan.

The researchers said that none of the hospitals they contacted in Oklahoma was totally able to articulate clear, consistent policies for emergency obstetric care to potential patients.

Specifically, 65% – 22 of the 34 hospitals – were unable to provide information about policies, procedures or the support provided to doctors when it is clinically necessary to terminate a pregnancy to save the life of a pregnant patient.

In 14 of the 22 cases, hospital representatives provided unclear and/or incomplete answers about whether doctors require approval to perform a medically necessary abortion.

Three of the hospitals said they do not provide abortions at all, even though it remains legal in the case of a medical emergency or to “preserve the life” of the pregnant person. Four others provided information that was factually wrong, the report says.

Four hospitals said they had formal approval processes that clinicians must go through if they have a situation in which it is medically necessary to terminate a pregnancy; they cannot make that decision on their own.

Three hospitals indicated that they have policies for these situations but refused to share any information about them.

“Unfortunately, it is being just left up to individual health systems and clinicians to try to make sense of these laws and provide guidance and support,” Heisler said.

The Oklahoma Hospital Association said it has been in conversations with Oklahoma’s medical licensure boards to seek clarity about the state’s conflicting abortion laws.

The association sent guidance to its members in September to explain what it interpreted as “saving the life of a pregnant woman” and what the laws would mean for a person made pregnant through rape or incest, among other issues. The guidance explains that the state’s criminal laws do not make an exception for these circumstances unless it is to save the life of someone who is pregnant in a medical emergency.

The guidance also warns that a person convicted of “administering, prescribing, advising, or procuring a woman to take any medicine drug or substance, or a person convicted of using or employing any instruction or ‘other means whatever,’ with the intent to procure an abortion, shall be guilty of a felony punishable by two (2) to (5) years imprisonment. From August 27, 2022, forward, a person convicted of performing or attempting to perform an abortion shall be guilty of a felony punishable by a fine not to exceed One Hundred Thousand ($100,000.00) and/or imprisonment not to exceed ten (10) years.”

The guidance says the “persons potentially liable” are the provider, not the pregnant person.

Study co-author Rabia Muqaddam, a senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights who is working on multiple cases challenging the abortion bans in Oklahoma, called the overlapping laws a “bizarre” situation.

“Aside from the fact that there are so many of them is that they all conflict,” she said. “All of the laws have inconsistent definitions, which is where a lot of the confusion comes from for health care providers. What’s most dangerous for patients is the fact that the definitions of medical emergency and life-preserving abortions is unclear and inconsistent.”

“If I was the hospital general counsel and I was looking at these laws, I have absolutely no idea what my physician could or could not do in any particular circumstance,” she said.

When there is a lack of clarity and when penalties are involved, “what you get is massive chill.”

“Physicians are terrified. They’re terrified that if they make the wrong decision, they’re going to go to jail. They’re going to lose their license. And at the other end of that is that patients are being seriously harmed,” Muqaddam said.

Sonia M. Suter, a professor of law at George Washington University who was not involved in the new research, said recent abortion laws have created “such a mess.”

“You are telling physicians that they have two conflicting obligations,” said Suter, whose scholarship focuses on issues at the intersection of law, medicine and bioethics, with a particular focus on reproductive rights.

There is an obligation to stabilize patients in emergencies that may not always qualify as “life-threatening,” but doctors and hospitals could also risk being sued because the doctors are not following the standard of care, “which you can’t do with how some of these exceptions are worded.”

She said hospitals also don’t know how the laws will be applied. Lawyers typically will instruct institutions to interpret the law as conservatively as possible, and physicians may be equally conservative because they don’t want to risk their licenses or face stiff penalties.

“It’s just devastating for everybody,” Suter said. “It’s just cruel.”

Molly Meegan, general counsel for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said state laws to restrict abortion with emergency exceptions are not comprehensive.

“They can’t be applied in a medical situation. They just aren’t practical,” she said. “They have an ethical and personal duty to their patients to do what is best for their patients. It can at times be in direct conflict with whatever the laws are, especially if they’re vague, and most of the ob/gyns throughout the country, including in Oklahoma, are in an impossible situation.”

Meegan and Suter both believe the confusion will lead to the deaths of more women. Those who survive may be left with dire health problems, including losing the ability to have children in the future.

“They already have horrific maternal mortality and infant mortality rates,” Suter said. “It feels like the end of evidence-based medicine.”

According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Oklahoma persistently ranks among the states with the worst rates of maternal deaths, even before the new abortion laws went into effect. The state had a maternal mortality rate of 25.2 deaths per 100,000 live births for 2018-20, well above the national average.

For communities of color, the rate is significantly worse, according to the Oklahoma Health Department.

White women had 23.2 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births for 2018-20, the lowest rate overall in Oklahoma. The rates for Black women and Native American women were about twice as high: 49.4 and 44.4, respectively.

Oklahoma is not alone. The 13 states where most abortions are banned generally have some of the highest infant and maternal mortality rates in the country, Heisler said. Even more states could be restricting abortion access soon, the experts believe, with potentially more problems to come.

“The hostile climate many states are creating for the health care field by enacting criminal and other penalties for abortion care is an outcome whose reverberations we are only just beginning to see,” said Kelly Baden, vice president for public policy at the reproductive health nonprofit Guttmacher Institute.

Heisler noted that the researchers don’t blame the hospitals or the doctors for this confusion. Overall, she said, the staffers who talked to the researchers “were wonderful,” despite the circumstances.

“They were empathetic. They said, ‘I completely understand.’ They tried to give answers. They acted in good faith. But really, none of the hospitals were really able to say what we were hoping for, which is to unequivocally state that they would stand behind their clinicians and that clinicians at their facilities would be able to use their best clinical judgment for the individual case and that it would be made as medical decisions should be in collaboration with the patient, taking into account to their needs, their preferences and their values,” she said.

“We are recognizing that hospitals and clinicians are in an untenable situation,” Heisler added.

Source link

#contradictory #laws #hospitals #state #unable #explain #policies #emergency #abortion #care #study #finds #CNN

These women ran an underground abortion network in the 1960s. Here’s what they fear might happen today | CNN



CNN
 — 

The voice on the phone in 1966 was gruff and abrupt: “Do you want the Chevy, the Cadillac or the Rolls Royce?”

A Chevy abortion would cost about $200, cash in hand, the voice explained. A Cadillac was around $500, and the Rolls Royce was $1,000.

“You can’t afford more than the Chevy? Fine,” the voice growled. “Go to this address at this time. Don’t be late and don’t forget the cash.” The voice disappeared.

Dorie Barron told CNN she recalls staring blankly at the phone in her hand, startled by the sudden empty tone. Then it hit her: She had just arranged an illegal abortion with the Chicago Mafia.

The motel Barron was sent to was in an unfamiliar part of Chicago, a scary “middle of nowhere,” she said. She was told to go to a specific room, sit on the bed and wait. Suddenly three men and a woman came in the door.

“I was petrified. They spoke all of three sentences to me the entire time: ‘Where’s the money?’ ‘Lie back and do as I tell you.’ And finally ‘Get in the bathroom,’” when the abortion was over, Barron said. “Then all of a sudden they were gone.”

Bleeding profusely, Barron managed to find a cab to take her home. When the bleeding didn’t stop, her bed-ridden mother made her go to the hospital.

At 24, Barron was taking care of her ailing mother and her 2-year-old daughter when she discovered she was pregnant. Her boyfriend, who had no job and lived with his parents, “freaked,” said Barron, who appears in a recent HBO documentary. The boyfriend suggested she get an abortion. She had never considered that option.

“But what was I to do? My mom was taking care of my daughter from her bed while I worked — they would read and play games until I got home,” Barron said.”How was either of us going to cope with a baby?

“Looking back, I realize I was taking my life in my hands,” said Barron, now an 81-year-old grandmother. “To this day it gives me chills. If I had died, what in God’s green earth would have happened to my mom and daughter?”

Women in the 1960s endured restrictions relatively unknown to women today. The so-called “fairer sex” could not serve on juries and often could not get an Ivy League education. Women earned about half as much as a man doing the same job and were seldom promoted.

Women could not get a credit card unless they were married — and then only if their husband co-signed. The same applied to birth control — only the married need apply. More experienced women shared a workaround with the uninitiated: “Go to Woolworth, buy a cheap wedding-type ring and wear it to your doctor’s appointment. And don’t forget to smile.”

Marital rape wasn’t legally considered rape. And, of course, women had no legal right to terminate a pregnancy until four states — Alaska, Hawaii, New York and Washington — legalized abortion in 1970, three years before Roe v. Wade became the law of the land.

Illinois had no such protection, said Heather Booth, a lifelong feminist activist and political strategist: “Three people discussing having an abortion in Chicago in 1965 was a conspiracy to commit felony murder.”

Despite that danger, a courageous band of young women — most in their 20’s, some in college, some married with children — banded together in Chicago to create an underground abortion network. The group was officially created in 1969 as the “Abortion Counseling Service of Women’s Liberation.”

But after running ads in an underground newspaper: “Pregnant? Don’t want to be? Call Jane,” each member of the group answered the phone as “Jane.”

Despite their youth, members of Jane managed to run an illegal abortion service dedicated to each woman's needs.
From left: Martha Scott, Jeanne Galatzer-Levy, Abby Pariser, Sheila Smith and Madeline Schwenk.

“We were co-conspirators with the women who called us,” said 75-year-old Laura Kaplan, who published a book about the service in 1997 entitled “The Story of Jane: The Legendary Underground Feminist Abortion Service.”

“We’ll protect you; we hope you’ll protect us,” Kaplan said. “We’ll take care of you; we hope you’ll take care of us.”

What started as referrals to legitimate abortion providers changed to personalized service when some members of Jane learned to safely do the abortions themselves. Between the late 1960s and 1973, the year that the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, Jane had arranged or performed over 11,000 abortions.

“Our culture is always searching for heroes,” said Kaplan. “But you don’t have to be a hero to do extraordinary things. Jane was just ordinary people working together — and look what we could accomplish, which is amazing, right?”

Even after several members were caught and arrested, the group continued to provide abortions for women too poor to travel to states where abortion had been legalized.

“I prayed a lot. I didn’t want to go to jail,” said 80-year-old Marie Learner, who allowed the Janes to perform abortions at her apartment.

“Some of us had little children. Some were the sole breadwinners in their home,” Learner said. “It was fearlessness in the face of overwhelming odds.”

Marie Learner opened her home to women undergoing abortions. Her neighbors knew, she said, but did not tell police.

The story of Jane has been immortalized in Kaplan’s book, numerous print articles, a 2022 movie, “Call Jane,” starring Elizabeth Banks and Sigourney Weaver, and a documentary on HBO (which, like CNN, is owned by Warner Bros. Discovery).

Today the historical tale of Jane has taken on a new significance. After the 2022 Supreme Court reversal of Roe v. Wade and the mid-term takeover of the US House of Representatives by Republicans, emboldened conservative lawmakers and judges have acted on their anti-abortion beliefs.

Currently more than a dozen states have banned or imposed severe restrictions on abortion. Georgia has banned abortions after six weeks, even though women are typically unaware they are pregnant at that stage. In mid-April, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill that would ban most abortions after six weeks. It won’t go into effect until the state Supreme Court overturns its previous precedent on abortion. Several other states are considering similar legislation. In other states, judicial battles are underway to protect abortion access.

“It’s a horrific situation right now. People will be harmed, some may even die,” said Booth, who helped birth the Jane movement while in college.

“Women without family support, without the information they need, may be isolated and either harm themselves looking to end an unwanted pregnancy or will be harmed because they went to an unscrupulous and illegal provider,” said Booth, now 77.

A key difference between the 60s and today is medication abortion, which 54% of people in the United States used to end a pregnancy in 2022. Available via prescription and through the mail, use of the drugs is two-fold: A person takes a first pill, mifepristone, to block the hormone needed for a pregnancy to continue.  A day or two later, the patient takes a second drug, misoprostol, which causes the uterus to contract, creating the cramping and bleeding of labor.

In early April a Texas judge, US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk – a Trump appointee who has been vocal about his anti-abortion stance — suspended the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone despite 23 years of data showing the drug is safe to use, safer even than penicillin or Viagra.

On Friday, the Supreme Court froze the ruling and a subsequent decision by the Fifth US Circuit Court of Appeals at the request of the Justice Department and the drug manufacturer. The action allows access to mifepristone in states where it’s legal until appeals play out over the months to come.

However, 15 states currently restrict access to medication abortion, even by mail.

The actions of anti-abortion activists, who have been accused of “judge shopping” to get the decisions they want, is “an unprecedented attack on democracy meant to undermine the will of the vast majority of Americans who want this pill — mifepristone — to remain legal and available,” Heather Booth told CNN.

“This is a further weaponization of the courts to brazenly advance the end goal of banning abortion entirely,” she added.

If women in her day could have had access to medications that could be used safely in their homes, they would not have been forced to risk their lives, said Dorie Barron, thinking back to her own terrifying abortion in a sketchy Chicago motel.

“I’m depressed as hell, watching stupid, indifferent men control and destroy women’s lives all over again,” she said. “I really fear getting an abortion could soon be like 1965.”

Chicago college student Heather Booth had just finished a summer working with civil rights activists in Mississippi when she was asked to help with a different kind of injustice.

Heather Booth, 18, with civil rights heroine Fannie Lou Hamer during

A girl in another dorm was considering suicide because she was pregnant. Booth, who excelled at both organization and chutzpah, found a local doctor and negotiated an abortion for the girl. Word spread quickly.

“There were about 100 women a week calling for help, much more than one person could handle,” Booth said. “I recruited about 12 other people and began training them how to do the counseling.”

Counseling was a key part of the new service. This was a time when people “barely spoke about sex, how women’s bodies functioned or even how people got pregnant,” Booth said. To help each woman understand what was going to happen to them, Booth quizzed the abortion provider about every aspect of the procedure.

“What do you do in advance? Will it be painful? How painful? Can you walk afterwards? Do you need someone to be with you to take you home?” The questions continued: “What amount of bleeding is expected, and can a woman handle it on their own? If there’s a problem is there an urgent number they can call?”

Armed with details few if any physicians provided, the counselors at Jane could fully inform each caller about the abortion experience. The group even published a flyer describing the procedure, long before the groundbreaking 1970 book “Our Bodies, Ourselves” began to educate women about their sexuality and health.

“I don’t particularly like doctors because I always feel dissatisfied with the experience,” said Marie Learner, who spoke to many of the women who underwent an abortion at her home.

“But after their abortion at Jane, women told me, ‘Wow, that was the best experience I’ve ever had with people helping me with a medical issue.’”

Eileen Smith, now 73, was one of those women. “Jane made you feel like you were part of this bigger picture, like we were all in this together,” she said. “They helped me do this illegal thing and then they’re calling to make sure I’m OK? Wow!

“For me, it helped battle the feeling that I was a bad person, that ‘What’s wrong with me? Why did I get pregnant? I should know better’ voice in my head,” said Smith. “It was priceless.”

Like many young women in the 60s, Heather Booth often protested for civil and women's rights.

Many of the women who joined Jane had never experienced an abortion. Some viewed the work as political, a part of the burgeoning feminist movement. Others considered the service as simply humanitarian health care. All saw the work as an opportunity to respect each woman’s choice.

“I was a stay-at-home mom with four kids,” said Martha Scott, who is now in her 80s. “We knew the woman needed to feel as though she was in control of what was happening to her. We were making it happen for her, but it was not about us. It was about her.”

Some volunteers, like Dorie Barron, experienced the Jane difference firsthand when she found herself pregnant a few years after her abortion at the hands of the Mafia.

“It was a 100% total reversal — I had never experienced such kindness,” Barron said. Not only did a Jane hold each woman’s hand and explain every step of the process, “they gave each of us a giant supply of maternity sanitary pads, and a nice big handful of antibiotics,” she said. “And for the next week, I got a phone call every other day to see how I was.”

Barron soon began volunteering for Jane by providing pregnancy testing for women in the back of a church in Chicago’s Hyde Park.

“It wasn’t just abortion,” Barron explained. “We also said, ‘You could consider adoption,’ and gave adoption referrals. And if the woman wanted to continue with her pregnancy, we said, ‘Fine, please by all that is holy make sure you get prenatal care, take your vitamins, and eat as best you can.’ It was women helping women with whatever they needed.”

Most of the women who contacted Jane were unable to support themselves, in unhealthy relationships, or already had children at home, so the service was a way of “helping them get back on track,” said Smith, who, like Barron, had begun working for Jane after her abortion.

“We were telling them ‘This isn’t the end of the world. You can continue to leave your boyfriend or your husband or continue to just take care of those kids you have.’ We were there to help them get through this,” said Smith, who later became a homecare nurse.

From left: Eileen Smith, Diane Stevens and Benita Greenfield were three of the dozens of women who volunteered for Jane.

Diane Stevens says she came to work for Jane after experiencing an abortion in 1968 at the age of 19. She was living in California at the time, which provided “therapeutic abortions” if approved in advance by physicians.

“I’d had a birth control failure, and I was coached by Planned Parenthood on how to do this,” said Stevens, now 74. “I had to see two psychiatrists and one doctor and tell them I was not able to go through with the pregnancy because it would a danger to both my physical and mental health.

“I was admitted to the psychiatric ward, although I didn’t really know that — I thought I was just in a hospital bed. But oh no, ‘I was mentally ill,’ so that’s where they put me,” said Stevens, who later went to nursing school with Smith. “Then they wheeled me off for the abortion. I had general anesthesia, was there for two days, and then I was discharged. Isn’t that crazy?”

Sakinah Ahad Shannon, now 75, was one of the few Black women who volunteered as a counselor at Jane. She joined after accompanying a friend who was charged a mere $50 for her abortion. At that time, Jane’s fee was between $1 and $100, based on what the woman could afford to pay, Shannon said.

“When I walked in, I said, ‘Oh my God, here we go again. It’s a room of White women, archangels who are going to save the world,’” said Shannon, a social worker and member of the Congress of Racial Equality, an interracial group of non-violent activists who pioneered “Freedom Rides” and helped organize the March on Washington in 1963.

What she heard and saw at her friend’s counseling session was so impressive it “changed my life,” Shannon said. She and her family later opened and operated three Chicago abortion clinics for over 25 years, all using the Jane philosophy of communication and respect.

“It was a profoundly amazing experience for me,” she said. “I call the Janes my sisters. The color line didn’t matter. We were all taking the same risk.”

Sakinah Ahad Shannon and her daughters went on to open and run three abortion clinics in Chicago.

It wasn’t long before the women discovered a “doctor” performing abortions for Jane had been lying about his credentials. There was no medical degree — in the HBO documentary, he admitted he had honed his skills by assisting an abortion provider.

The group imploded. A number of members quit in horror and dismay. For the women who stayed, it was an epiphany, said Martha Scott. Like her, several of the Janes had been assisting this fake doctor for years, learning the procedures step by step.

“You’d learn how to insert a speculum, then how to swap out the vagina with an antiseptic, then how to give numbing shots around the cervix and then how to dilate the cervix. You learned and mastered each step before you moved on to the next,” said Laura Kaplan, who chronicled the procedure in her book.

By now, several of the Janes were quite experienced and willing to do the work. Why not perform the abortions themselves?

“Clearly, this was an intense responsibility,” said Judith Acana, a 27-year-old high school teacher who joined Jane in 1970. She started her training by helping “long terms,” women who were four or five months along in the pregnancy.

“Remember, abortion was illegal (in Illinois) so it could take weeks for a woman to find help,” said Arcana, now 80. “Frequently women who wanted an abortion at 8 or 10 weeks wound up being 16 or 18 weeks or more by the time they found Jane.”

The miscarriage could happen quickly, but it rarely did, she said. It usually took anywhere from one to two days.

“Women who had no one to help them would come back when contractions started,” Arcana said. “One of my strongest memories is of a teenage girl who had an appointment to have her miscarriage on my living room floor.”

The group also paid two Janes to live in an apartment and be on call 24/7 to assist women who had no one to help them miscarry at home, said Arcana, a lifelong educator, author and poet. “But many women took care of it on their own, in very amazing and impressive and powerful ways,” she said.

Judith Arcana learned how to do abortions herself and wrote about the Jane experience in poems, stories, essays and books.

Any woman who had concerns or questions while miscarrying alone could always call Jane for advice any time of the day or night.

“People would call in a panic: ‘The bleeding won’t stop,’” Smith recalled. “I would tell them, ‘Get some ice, put it on your stomach, elevate your legs, relax.’ And they would say ‘Oh my gosh, thank you!’ because they were so scared.”

For women who were in their first trimester, Jane offered traditional D&C abortions — the same dilation and curettage used by hospitals then and today, said Scott, who performed many of the abortions for Jane. Later the group used vacuum aspiration, which was over in a mere five to 10 minutes.

“Vacuum aspiration was much easier to do, and I think it’s less difficult for the woman,” Scott said. “Abortion is exactly like any other medical procedure. It’s the decision that’s an issue — the doing is very straightforward. This was something a competent, trained person could do.”

It was May 3, 1972. Judith Arcana was the driver that day, responsible for relocating women waiting at what was called “the front” to a separate apartment or house where the abortions were done, known as “the place.”

On this day, a Wednesday, the “place” was a South Shore high-rise apartment. Arcana was escorting a woman who had completed her abortion when they were stopped by police at the elevator.

“They asked us, ‘Which apartment did you come out of?’ And the poor woman burst into tears and blurted out the apartment number,” Arcana said. “They took me downstairs, put cuffs on me and hooked me to a steel hook inside of the police van.”

Inside the apartment on the 11th floor, Martha Scott said she was setting up the bedroom for the next abortion when she heard a knock at the door, followed by screaming: “You can’t come in!”

“I shut the bedroom door and locked it,” Scott said, then hid the instruments and sat on the bed to wait. It wasn’t long until a cop kicked the door in and made her join the other women in the living room.

“We tell this joke about how the cops came in, saw all these women and said, ‘Where’s the abortionist?’ You know, assuming that it would be a man,” Scott said.

By day’s end, seven members of Jane were behind bars: Martha Scott, Diane Stevens, Judy Arcana, Jeanne Galatzer-Levy, Abby Pariser, Sheila Smith and Madeleine Schwenk. Suddenly what had been an underground effort for years was front page headlines.

“Had we not gotten arrested, I think no one would ever have known about Jane other than the women we served,” Scott said.

Top: Sheila Smith and Martha Scott.
Bottom: Diane Stevens and Judith Arcana.

An emergency meeting of Jane was called. The turnout was massive — even women who had not been active in months showed up, anxious to know the extent of the police probe, according to the women with whom CNN spoke.

Despite widespread fear and worry, the group immediately began making alternate plans for women scheduled for abortions at Jane in the next few days to weeks. The group even paid for transportation to other cities where abortion had already been legalized, they said.

News reports over the next few days gave further details of the bust: There was no widespread investigation by the police. It was a single incident, triggered by a call from a sister-in-law who was upset with her relative’s decision to have an abortion, they said.

“It wasn’t long after I was arrested that I came back and worked for quite a few months,” said Scott, one of the few fully trained to do abortions.

“I like to think I was a good soldier,” Scott said. “I like to think what did made a difference not only to a whole bunch of people, but also to ourselves. It gave us a sense of empowerment that comes when you do something that is hard to do and also right.”

As paranoia eased, women began to come back to work at Jane, determined to carry on.

“After the bust, we had a meeting and were told ‘Everybody needs to start assisting and learn how to do abortions.’ I was like, ‘Whoa, whoa, whoa!’” said Eileen Smith, who had not been arrested. “But you felt like you really didn’t have much of a choice. We had to keep the service running.”

Laura Kaplan volunteered for the Janes, later immortalizing the group in her book,

The preliminary hearing for the arrested seven was in August. Several of the women in the apartment waiting for abortions the day of the arrest suddenly developed amnesia and refused to testify. According to Kaplan’s book, one of the women later said, “The cops tried to push me around, but f**k them. I wasn’t going to tell on you.”

It didn’t matter. Each Jane was charged with 11 counts of abortion and conspiracy to commit abortion, with a possible sentence of up to 110 years in prison.

As they waited for trial, the lawyer for the seven, Jo-Anne Wolfson, adopted delaying tactics, Kaplan said. A case representing a Texas woman, cited as “Jane Roe” to protect her privacy, was being considered by the US Supreme Court. If the Court ruled in Roe’s favor, the case against the Jane’s might be thrown out.

That’s exactly what happened. On March 9, 1973, three months after the Supreme Court had legalized abortion in the US, the case against the seven women was dropped and their arrest records were expunged.

Later that spring, a majority of Janes, burned out by the intensity of the work over the last few years, voted to close shop. An end of Jane party was held on May 20. According to Kaplan’s book, the invitation read:

“You are cordially invited to attend The First, Last and Only Curette Caper; the Grand Finale of the Abortion Counseling Service. RSVP: Call Jane.”

Today, most of the surviving members of Jane are in their 70s and 80s, shocked but somehow not surprised by the actions of abortion opponents.

“This is a country of ill-educated politicos who know nothing about women’s bodies, nor do they care,” said Dorie Barron. “It will take generations to even begin to undo the devastating harm to women’s rights.”

In the meantime, women should research all available options, keep that information confidential, seek support from groups working for abortion rights, and “share your education with as many women as you can,” Barron added.

As more and more reproductive freedoms have been rolled back over the past year, many of the Janes are angry and fearful for the future.

Abortion rights demonstrators walk across the Brooklyn Bridge in New York nearly two weeks after the leak of a draft Supreme Court opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade.

“This is about the most intimate decision of our lives — when, whether and with whom we have a child. Everyone should have the ability to make decisions about our own lives, bodies, and futures without political interference,” said Heather Booth, who has spent her life after leaving Jane fighting for civil and women’s rights.

“We need to organize, raise our voices and our votes, and overturn this attack on our freedom and our lives. I have seen that when we take action and organize we can change the world.”

Source link

#women #ran #underground #abortion #network #1960s #Heres #fear #happen #today #CNN

Texas abortion drug ruling could create ‘slippery slope’ for FDA approvals, drug research and patients, experts say | CNN



CNN
 — 

What happened in one judge’s courtroom in Texas could have drastic effects for the United States’ entire drug approval process, experts warn.

US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s ruling that suspended the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the medication abortion drug mifepristone was an unprecedented one, the first time a court has bypassed the federal system set up to determine what drugs should be allowed on the market.

Regardless of whether the ruling – or a part of it – is ultimately allowed to stand, legal scholars, scientists and drugmakers are concerned that the decision could start a trend of drugs being targeted in courts, creating a chilling effect on drug development in the US and hurting patients in the process.

Vaccines, including the Covid-19 shots, antidepressants and psychotropic medicines could be at risk, some said.

“Well, one does not want to be Chicken Little,” former FDA Commissioner Dr. Jane Henney said Wednesday, but “I can’t imagine that it wouldn’t have implications for other products.

“The approval process will be at risk, and it’s not just an approval process that patients rely on and providers rely on, it’s one that has been considered the gold standard, really, for the world,” said Henney, who was the head of the FDA when mifepristone was approved.

Since the dawn of the 20th century, the FDA has had the sole authority in the United States to regulate drugs. In 1906, the federal government created the agency to enforce the Pure Food and Drug Act, which was instituted to ensure that medicine, food and cosmetics were safe.

Over the years, that authority became more defined.

After elixir of sulfanilamide, a drug used to treat streptococcal infections, killed 107 people in 1937, Congress created the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Signed into law in 1938 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, it required manufacturers to conduct pharmacological studies to prove that their drugs were safe before they could be sold or advertised. In 1962, drug manufacturers were also required to prove to the FDA that their products were effective.

Modern drug approval in the US is a careful and conscientious process. Before any drug goes to market, there are countless hours of research, the work and expertise of multiple scientists, and several layers of oversight for approval.

Until now, the courts have been deferential to the FDA’s process and have never overturned an FDA decision on the grounds that the agency misjudged the science, said William Schultz, a former deputy commissioner at the FDA and former general counsel for the Department of Health and Human Services.

“Any FDA drug approval involves hundreds of judgments by the agency. And if a court feels free just to kind of take a fresh look at each of those, there’s a chance that a court will find one of those FDA judgments wrong,” Schultz said in an online discussion Monday about the impact of the Texas court’s ruling that was hosted by Protect Our Care, an organization that advocates for equitable and affordable health care.

Hundreds of well-known biotech and pharmaceutical company leaders, concerned about the effects of Kacsmaryk’s ruling on other drug approvals, signed an open letter Monday in support of the FDA’s authority “to approve and regulate safe, effective medicines for every American.”

The letter also advocated a reversal of the mifepristone decision from a judge with “no scientific training,” saying it “set a precedent for diminishing FDA’s authority over drug approvals, and in so doing, creates uncertainty for the entire biopharma industry.”

In a separate statement, the biotech industry group BIO’s interim president and CEO, Rachel King, emphasized the “dangerous precedent” the decision sets.

“The preliminary ruling by a federal judge in Texas is an assault on science and the FDA’s long-standing role as the authority to make decisions on the safety and efficacy of medicines. For a court to invalidate the approval of a drug that was reviewed and approved more than two decades ago is without precedent. As legal scholars have noted, the courts do not have the medical expertise to make these types of scientific determinations,” King said.

The main lobbying group for the pharmaceutical industry, PhRMA, criticized Kacsmaryk’s ruling as undermining the regulatory process.

“PhRMA has serious concerns with any court substituting its opinion for the FDA’s expert approval decision-making,” said James C. Stansel, the association’s executive vice president, general counsel and corporate secretary. Stansel added that such a decision could have a “chilling effect on the research and development ecosystem.”

The pharmacutical sector is a huge part of the American economy. Of the world’s 25 largest phamacutical companies, 10 are based in the US, and most of the others have a large base of operations in the country.

Often, the US market is the first to get access to new drugs, but that could change if lawsuits undermine the regulatory integrity of the FDA process, said Susan Lee, partner in the law firm Goodwin’s Life Sciences group and Life Sciences Regulatory & Compliance practice, who works with companies to get drugs approved by the FDA.

“If there do tend to be more lawsuits like this, I wonder if there might be a little bit of a tendency to not always look at the US as the first market,” Lee said. “Some manufacturers may say ‘we’d rather go to Europe, where we’re not going to be sued on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis.’ “

Lee also wonders whether manufacturers will abandon efforts to develop drugs that could be considered unappealing to some, such as those that help women’s health or work to prevent HIV.

“I think there are just certain sectors that are already kind of thinking about whether they might also have a target on their back. I’ve definitely heard that discussed,” Lee said.

The groups at the heart of the Texas case have not disclosed any further plans regarding lawsuits over medications, but experts say they are already hearing concern.

“I’ve already been getting questions from lawmakers and other people about ‘could the Covid vaccine be next?’ or other things that may have stigma around it,” said Dr. Kristyn Brandi, an ob/gyn and abortion provider in New Jersey and a spokesperson for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

The Covid-19 vaccines have been thoroughly tested and found to be safe and effective, but they’re the subject of conspiracy theories and misunderstanding about how mRNA vaccines were tested. Beliefs that the vaccines were tested on recently harvested aborted fetal cells made some people decidedly anti-vaccine.

Dr. Lynn R. Goldman, professor and dean of the Milken Institute School of Public Health at George Washington University, is also concerned that mRNA vaccines could be targeted soon.

“There might be people who disagree with some of the technologies that are used by vaccine makers, like the mRNA vaccines, but feeling uncomfortable about a technology is not the same thing as identifying that there is risk,” she said in the Protect Our Care conversation.

Members of the LGBTQ+ community may also be vulnerable, experts say, as activists could target puberty blockers or hormones used in gender-affirming therapy.

“I don’t like to do slippery slope, but I’m also very worried about things like gender-affirming care, since there’s already been so many laws about that recently in other states,” Brandi said.

There is political pressure against other vaccines, antidepressants and psychotropic medicines, among others, former FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg and former Principal Deputy Commissioner Joshua Sharfstein wrote in an editorial published Thursday in the journal Science.

“If judges begin to dictate the terms of medication access, then others will seek to use ideology and influence to advance their agendas,” they warn.

Goldman said that any legal decision that could undermine the FDA drug approval process would ultimately hurt the doctors who prescribe them and the people who use them.

Doctors don’t have time to vet all the studies used to prove that a drug is safe and effective, so they rely on the FDA for this work, she said. Court interference could confuse this process.

“I think that this is, for doctors, an incredibly serious moment, because up to now, we have been able to trust that an approval by the FDA is a science-based decision and that we can say that if the FDA has approved a drug, that it is safe for us to use,” Goldman said.

A lack of confidence in the drug approval process will ultimately hurt people far beyond the most recent decision, Protect Our Care Chair Leslie Dach says.

“Confidence that the FDA can do its work is essential for clinicians and patients who depend on it in its decision-making for matters of life and death,” Dach said.

Source link

#Texas #abortion #drug #ruling #create #slippery #slope #FDA #approvals #drug #research #patients #experts #CNN

What is autism? An expert explains | CNN



CNN
 — 

Some individuals with autism have challenges processing senses. Others struggle to communicate. Still others might have a tough time socializing, thinking, physically moving or just going about daily living.

People with autism have their own ways of interacting with the world, because autism is a developmental disability that affects everyone who has it a little differently, according to Dr. Daniel Geschwind, the Gordon and Virginia Macdonald distinguished professor of human genetics, neurology and psychiatry at UCLA.

Geschwind has spent 25 years studying autism and what causes it. To mark Autism Awareness Month, CNN talked with him about what autism is and what causes it.

This conversation has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.

CNN: What is autism?

Dr. Daniel Geschwind: Autism refers to a broad range of conditions characterized by challenges with social skills and social and communication and repetitive behaviors, resistance to changes in routine, or restricted interests. I prefer to call it “the Autisms,” because it’s not one thing, and no two autistic children or adults are exactly alike even though they may share basic features. People with autism may also have some sensory-motor integration issues, especially sensory hypersensitivity.

CNN: How prevalent is autism today?

Geschwind: It isn’t rare. The most recent statistics (from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) came out in March, pulled data from 11 sites (in the United States) and reported 1 out of every 36 kids is autistic. The study before that estimated around 1 in 40. About 10 years ago, the autism rate was 1 in 100, or even lower.

It would be easy to look at this trend and say autism is increasing, but that’s not really what is happening. The most recent data reflects that our ability to recognize autism and diagnose it early has improved dramatically. We’re now able to diagnose people with autism who might have (previously) fallen through the cracks.

Everybody is neurodivergent to some extent. For example, if you look at a simple IQ test, a substantial portion of people will perform really badly on one specific item. That doesn’t mean they have problems — it’s just that it means we all have strengths and weaknesses.

If I were being tested on artistic ability, for example, or engineering ability, I would be far below what’s called typical. I think we have to accept that intelligence is not just one thing, that cognition isn’t one thing, that there’s not just one way to behave.

CNN: What does it mean when people describe some as being “on the spectrum”?

Geschwind: About a decade ago, the term “autism spectrum disorder” was adopted to encompass everything that we called autism into one rubric. The intent was simply to describe the variability in how people with autism act and behave biomedically. There are some autistic individuals who just need accommodations and don’t need treatment. There are other autistic individuals who need a lot of treatment. The spectrum was intended to include them all.

Over time, non-autistic people began referring to the spectrum in a linear fashion: high to low. That means some autistic individuals were categorized as “high-functioning,” while others were categorized as “low-functioning.” For many, the notion of a spectrum is now a loaded term. Many believe that instead of talking about autism in a linear fashion, we should talk about it as a wheel or pie, where each slice represents a different trait and every individual has different strengths and weaknesses.

CNN: Is there a cure for autism?

Geschwind: There is no cure. At the same time, we’ve come very far in understanding what autism is, and we’re making progress on how to treat it. When I started researching autism 25 years ago, the autism rate was 1 in 1,000 or 1 in 2,000. To put it in deeper historical perspective, I think at that time there was only about $10 million a year or less in autism research being done that was funded (by the National Institutes of Health). And so, there was a huge disconnect between the research dollars, public awareness and the real needs of patients and families.

The notion of the term “curing” autism can be controversial. From my perspective, our true goal is to establish a kind of personalized medicine, or precision health in autism and other neuropsychiatric disorders, so that each autistic person is seen as the individual they are. We envision a world where individuals who are severely impacted by autism have the opportunity to get therapy and drugs that can help them — and those for whom a therapy is not warranted or who don’t want it will have opportunities to live life the way they want to as well. Patient autonomy and societal accommodation are important aspects when considering these issues.

CNN: What causes autism?

Geschwind: Almost every medical condition has both genetic and environmental components. In autism, it seems that heritability is very high. The most recent large study suggested that heritable genetic factors — the things that you get from your parents that your parents have in their DNA — are probably somewhere around 80% or slightly higher.

That leaves 20% that’s nonheritable, and of that we know that at least 10% of autism is caused by rare mutations that are not inherited. And that sounds like a paradox, but it’s not. If you think about Down syndrome, that’s a genetic mutation that the parents don’t have in their DNA. That’s called a new, or de novo, mutation.

You can calculate a risk score for having autism based on genetics, (but) right now, the risk score for autism is not that predictive because we haven’t done enough research. For other conditions like cardiovascular or certain cancers, risk scores are very predictive because very large numbers of people have been studied.

Even so, this autism risk score is strongly correlated with high educational attainment, or a high IQ, which again speaks to the strengths associated with being autistic and highlights that we need to be more aware of the strengths that autistic individuals may have as well to optimize their opportunities to achieve their goals or contribute to society.

There also are several environmental factors that have been shown to increase the risk of autism. One of them is maternal exposure to valproate, which is an anti-epilepsy medication. There are several maternal viral infections that have been associated with autism. And two other things: the interbirth interval — how quickly after one birth a mother has another — and the age of the father. The thought on the last point is that as a man ages, their DNA repair mechanisms are maybe less active, and there are more frequent mutations in sperm.

A key point is that all these known environmental factors act prenatally, so in most cases the tendency towards being on the spectrum is something that individuals are born with.

CNN: To what extent has research debunked the controversial notion that vaccines can cause autism?

Geschwind: The notion that vaccines cause autism has been entirely (disproved). There have been dozens of studies, using very different methodologies. There is absolutely no evidence that vaccines cause autism, and there’s been much more harm than good done by purveyors of that fiction.

CNN: How do you treat autism?

Geschwind: It is imperative to have an early diagnosis, because we know that early identification and early intervention with behavioral therapies can be effective in up to 50% of kids. Some kids will respond so well that it’s very hard to make a diagnosis of autism when they’re 9 years old if the therapy is started early enough.

The problem is that for many autistic individuals, current therapies are not that effective. There’s a lot of work being done developing more effective cognitive behavioral therapies, figuring out which therapy is the best for which child. There’s also work being done to develop medications that can be helpful to treat certain symptoms such as injurious behavior, repetitive behavior or difficulty with changes in routines.

My colleagues and I want to use treatment to augment and improve people’s symptoms, not change who they are fundamentally. We believe strongly in every individual’s autonomy. We also believe in personalized medicine so that it’s not one-size-fits-all. There will be some patients in whom we’re trying to correct a severe genetic mutation that has profound consequences, and there’ll be others that need only a handful of accommodations, just like we provide for folks who need wheelchairs.

CNN: What will your research focus on next?

Geschwind: There are two basic frontiers in my research. One recognizes that most of the work in neuropsychiatric disorders and autism has been done in primarily White European populations and focuses on a pressing need to be studying diverse populations. About seven or eight years ago, I started working with African American communities because certain aspects of genetics are population-specific, and we as researchers really need to understand that.

The frontier that is crosscutting across all of this is we need to be able to move from genetics in a population to genetics in an individual, so that by looking at somebody’s genetic makeup, we can understand the mechanism of their autism. This is precision medicine.

My work is trying to understand how specific genetic variants, how specific mutations, impact brain development to eventually lead to the symptoms of autism. If my colleagues and I can understand that mechanism, just like we can understand the genetic mechanism in cancer, we can find a drug to target that and improve those symptoms over time.

Source link

#autism #expert #explains #CNN

Clinics and doctors brace for more restrictions on women’s health care after court ruling on abortion drug | CNN



CNN
 — 

Less than a year after the US Supreme Court ended legal protection for abortions nationwide, clinics that provide reproductive health care across the United States are bracing for more restrictions on the care they provide to women.

If a judge’s ruling takes effect Friday, it may soon be illegal for doctors to prescribe mifepristone, the first in a two-drug regimen that can help women terminate a pregnancy at home – and that has other uses.

At Northeast Ohio Women’s Center, staffers are calling patients who expected to get medication abortions next week, telling them to change their plans.

“They’re scrambling to change their schedules to get in to see us earlier,” said Dr. David Burkons, the physician who runs the clinics.

About half of abortions in the US use mifepristone, which is sold under the brand name Mifeprex.

Mifeprex blocks the hormone progesterone, which effectively stops a pregnancy from continuing. For an abortion, women take mifepristone first, followed one or two days later by misoprostol, a drug that causes the uterus to contract, cramp and bleed, similar to a heavy period. It empties out the uterus, ending the pregnancy. It can be used up to 10 weeks of pregnancy.

But the uses of mifepristone go beyond abortion.

The drug helps soften and open the cervix, the neck of the uterus, and doctors depend on it to help when women are having a miscarriage and when a pregnancy needs to be terminated quickly if the life of the mother is at stake.

In certain situations, when a pregnancy has become too risky, time is of the essence, says Dr. Alison Edelman, who directs the division of Complex Family Planning at Oregon Health and Sciences University.

“The more expediently that we can have somebody not be pregnant, the better, and mifepristone helps us speed that process up and make it safer for patients,” she said.

Doctors also use mifepristone before procedures in which they need to go into the uterus, such as to remove bleeding polyps. Studies have shown that the drug helps reduce the amount of force needed to open the cervix and reduces the amount of blood loss associated with the procedure.

Studies also show that mifepristone has moderate to strong benefits for inducing labor and treating uterine fibroids and endometriosis, sometimes helping avoid surgery, according to the American Society of Health Systems Pharmacists.

It can be used to prevent bleeding between periods and to control hyperstimulation of the ovaries during in-vitro fertilization, the society said in a statement.

Doctors say they still have other ways to treat those problems, but when considering the needs of individual patients, they will be missing a valuable tool.

“We have our gold standard of what we provide – the safest, most effective regimen – and then if it’s not available, we use the next best one. And that’s what we would be left with,” Edelman said.

Mifepristone has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for 23 years, and it has been used by over 5 million women in the United States. FDA data shows that less than 1% of women who take it have significant adverse events. A CNN analysis of FDA data found that mifepristone was even less risky than some other common medications, including Viagra and penicillin.

Medication abortions have become an increasingly important option for women in states that restricted abortion access after the Supreme Court’s ruling last year that ended legal protections for abortions in every state. They are also sometimes the only kind of abortion many women can get in rural areas that have lost abortion providers.

This ease of access has also made the medication regimen a target for abortion opponents.

“They want to see a national ban, and this is in fact what they are going for in this case,” said Kristen Moore, director of the EMAA Project, a nonprofit that is seeking to make it easier to get abortion medications in the US.

What will happen next is far from settled. Appeals have been filed to stop the ruling in Texas from taking hold, and higher courts will have to weigh in.

Even if the court does take mifepristone off the market in the US, doctors say, they will still be able to provide medication abortions using misoprostol alone.

In fact, some abortion providers have been planning on using misoprostol by itself in case mifepristone is isn’t available.

Carafem, which provides telehealth abortion care, has been offering a misoprostol-only regimen since the Covid-19 pandemic began, Chief Operating Officer Melissa Grant says.

“In 2020, we started to use misoprostol alone as an option,” she said. Workers have since been tweaking the regimen and gathering data.

“We now feel confident that, even though we would much prefer to use both, that we can use misoprostol alone effectively and are ready to switch gears to have a higher percentage of our clients or even 100% of our colleagues use that option if necessary,” Grant said.

Still, some providers said it’s not ideal.

The misoprostol-only regimen is slightly less effective than the one that uses both drugs, and it causes more cramping and bleeding, which can mean more complications.

“We’re more likely to see failures and therefore more likely to need surgical intervention after misoprostol alone,” said Dr. Erika Werner, chair of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Tufts Medical Center.

Still, doctors want women to know that medication abortions and miscarriage care will still be available even if mifepristone isn’t. And they hope that higher courts will intervene to keep this medication on pharmacy shelves.

“The clinicians would have to use these other options instead of choosing based on their own expertise, knowledge and judgment when rendering such care,” Dr. Iffath Hoskins, president of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said Monday. “Frankly, as a clinician, I do not want to be in that position.”

Correction: This story has been updated to include the correct name of Tufts Medical Center.

Source link

#Clinics #doctors #brace #restrictions #womens #health #care #court #ruling #abortion #drug #CNN

Concerned about the courts, some states and universities are stockpiling abortion drugs | CNN



CNN
 — 

With an eye on the courts, a growing number of Democratic-led states are stockpiling the pills that can be used for a medication abortion, the most common form of the procedure in the US.

The officials want to be prepared, in case US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s decision to suspend the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone goes through, so medication abortions would still be available in their states for some period of time. But they’re taking different approaches to the idea.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul announced Tuesday that her state’s Department of Health would buy 150,000 doses of misoprostol, the other of the two drugs typically used in a medication abortion.

Misoprostol can be used off-label for an abortion, without mifepristone, but patients often have to use more of it. It would not be covered by the court case, and if Kacsmaryk’s decision stands, the New York City’s Health Department tweeted, it will change to using this medication only.

“Medication abortion continues to be available at our Sexual Health Clinics and NYC Health + Hospitals locations. Should mifepristone become unavailable, we will continue to make medication abortion accessible to all in NYC by shifting to a misoprostol-only treatment regimen,” the tweet said.

The state says the 150,000 doses should represent a five-year supply of pills.

“Anti-choice extremists have shown that they are not stopping at overturning Roe, and they are working to entirely dismantle our country’s reproductive health care system, including medication abortion and contraception,” Hochul said. “New York will always be a safe harbor for abortion care, and I am taking action to protect abortion access in our State and continue to lead the nation in defending the right to reproductive autonomy.”

California is also stocking up on misoprostol.

“While California still believes Mifepristone is central to the preferred regimen for medication abortion, the State negotiated and purchased an emergency stockpile of Misoprostol in anticipation of Friday’s ruling by far-right federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk to ensure that California remains a safe haven for safe, affordable, and accessible reproductive care,” Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office said in a release Monday.

California plans to purchase up to 2 million pills through CalRx, a state initiative set up to make drugs more affordable.

The governor’s office said the state now has more than 250,000 pills on hand, which it purchased for about $100,000.

California said it shared the terms of its purchase agreement with other members of the Reproductive Freedom Alliance, a nonpartisan coalition of 21 governors who are committed to protecting reproductive rights, and who might also be interested in taking such action.

Another member of that alliance, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, announced last week that his state bought a three year-supply of mifepristone, the drug at the center of Kacsmaryk’s ruling.

Inslee directed the state Department of Corrections – which has a pharmacy license and is legally able to buy medications – to buy the drug last month, he said, and the shipment was delivered March 31. The University of Washington also purchased 10,000 doses.

Lawmakers are introducing a bill to authorize officials to distribute or sell the medication to licensed providers throughout the state.

“This Texas lawsuit is a clear and present danger to patients and providers all across the country. Washington will not sit by idly and risk the devastating consequences of inaction,” Inslee said. “Washington is a pro-choice state, and no Texas judge will order us otherwise.”

In the meantime, its attorney general, Bob Ferguson, is helping lead a multistate lawsuit to protect access to mifepristone.

On Friday, the same day Kacsmaryk’s ruling came down, a federal judge in Washington ordered the US not to make any changes that would restrict access to mifepristone in the territories that brought the lawsuit: 17 states and the District of Columbia.

On Monday, Massachusetts Gov. Maura T. Healey announced that at her request, the University of Massachusetts and health care providers have also taken action to stockpile doses of mifepristone.

The governor’s office said last week that the university bought about 15,000 doses of mifepristone, enough to cover the commonwealth for about a year, and the pills are expected to arrive this week. Local health care providers have agreed to buy more, and the government agreed to set aside $1 million to pay for those doses.

The Massachusetts governor also signed an executive order confirming protections for medication abortion under existing law.

“Here in Massachusetts, we are not going to let one extremist judge in Texas turn back the clock on this proven medication and restrict access to care in our state,” Healey said. “The action we are taking today protects access to mifepristone in Massachusetts and protects patients and providers from liability. In Massachusetts, we stand for civil rights and freedom. We will always protect access to reproductive health care, including medication abortion.”

Danco Laboratories, the manufacturer of the brand-name version of mifepristone, says that orders for the drug have increased substantially in recent months and are significantly higher than they were at this time last year.

Demand for mifepristone is up across all types of customers, including clinics, pharmacies and individual providers, said Abby Long, Danco’s director of public affairs. But Massachusetts is the only state that has requested an especially large number of pills from the company.

Maine Gov. Janet Mills, who called the Texas decision “reckless” and a “fundamental assault on women’s rights,” said Monday that her administration is evaluating its options, “including procuring mifepristone if needed, to protect access to medication abortion for Maine women.”

The Connecticut governor’s office said Wednesday that it is also monitoring the situation.

Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek’s office said in an email Wednesday that she has directed the Oregon Health Authority to “explore all available avenues for ensuring Oregon is prepared should Mifepristone become less available. That includes evaluating the supply of Mifepristone and Misoprostol and consulting with providers to better understand the potential impact on the provision of abortion and reproductive health care and what additional support might be necessary.”



Source link

#Concerned #courts #states #universities #stockpiling #abortion #drugs #CNN

How safe is the abortion pill compared with other common drugs | CNN



CNN
 — 

A federal judge in Texas ruled on Friday to suspend the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone, the first drug in the medication abortion process, nationwide by the end of this week.

The judge sided with the coalition of anti-abortion national medical associations that filed the lawsuit. He argued that the FDA failed to adequately consider risks associated with the drug, including “the intense psychological trauma and post-traumatic stress women often experience from chemical abortion.”

However, data analyzed by CNN shows mifepristone is even safer than some common, low-risk prescription drugs, including penicillin and Viagra. There were five deaths associated with mifepristone use for every 1 million people in the US who have used the drug since its approval in 2000, according to the US Food and Drug Administration as of last summer. That’s a death rate of 0.0005%.

Comparatively, the risk of death by penicillin — a common antibiotic used to treat bacterial infections like pneumonia — is four times greater than it is for mifepristone, according to a study on life-threatening allergic reactions. Risk of death by taking Viagra — used to treat erectile dysfunction — is nearly 10 times greater, according to a study cited in the amicus brief filed by the FDA.

“[Mifepristone] has been used for over 20 years by over five million people with the capacity to become pregnant,” said Ushma Upadhyay, an associate professor in the department of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive science at the University of California, San Francisco. “Its safety is very well established.”

The Justice Department, the FDA, and Danco — a manufacturer of mifepristone that intervened in the case — have already appealed the ruling.

Within hours of the decision in Texas, a federal judge in Washington state issued a conflicting ruling that the federal government must keep mifepristone available in the 17 Democrat-led states and the District of Columbia that had sued in a separate lawsuit.

If the Texas ruling is allowed to take effect this week, 40 million more women of reproductive age would lose access to medication abortion care around the country, according to data from abortion rights advocacy group NARAL Pro-Choice America. That’s in addition to the 24.5 million women of reproductive age living in states with abortion bans.

“The court’s disregard for well-established scientific facts in favor of speculative allegations and ideological assertions will cause harm to our patients and undermines the health of the nation,” said Dr. Jack Resneck, Jr., president of the American Medical Association, in a statement. “By rejecting medical facts, the court has intruded into the exam room and has intervened in decisions that belong to patients and physicians.”

Medication abortion has become the most common method for abortion, accounting for more than half of all US abortions in 2020, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

The growing popularity of medication abortion is largely because of its accessibility, said Abigail Aiken, associate professor at the University of Texas at Austin who leads a research group on medication abortion.

“It reduces the cost, it reduces barriers where people may not want to go to a clinic,” she said.

It is also a safer option than both procedural abortion or childbirth. The rate of major complications — like hemorrhages or infections — for medication abortions is about one-third of a percent, according to a 2015 study conducted by Upadhyay. That means out of more than 11,000 cases, 35 experienced any major complications.

The likelihood of serious complications via procedural abortion — performed second-trimester or later — is slightly higher than medication abortion at 0.41%, according to the same study. And childbirth by far comes with the highest risk, at 1.3%.

If access to mifepristone is cut off, abortion clinics and telehealth organizations could pivot to misoprostol-only abortions, Aiken told CNN. Although misoprostol-only abortions are used around the world, they are less effective, associated with a higher risk of serious complications and often more painful than the mifepristone and misoprostol combination, she said.

In the latest study of self-managed misoprostol-only medication abortions in the US, Johnson found misoprostol-only abortions to be a safe alternative, though less safe than using both pills. The study, published in February, analyzed data from online telehealth medication abortion provider Aid Access from 2020. Nearly 90% of 568 users reported completed abortions and 2% experienced serious complications using only misoprostol.

Mifepristone and misoprostol together is still considered the gold standard, Aiken told CNN. People who used the two-pill combination were less likely to experience serious complications than those who went with the misoprostol-only regimen.

“It’s clear people can use these medications, mifepristone and misoprostol, at home even without the help of a medical professional very safely,” said Aiken.

Because misoprostol is used to treat multiple ailments including stomach ulcers, it’s readily stocked in pharmacies and unlikely to be taken off the market anytime soon, Johnson told CNN.

However, a lesser-effective method means more people will likely have unsuccessful abortions.

“It’s possible that it might not work for some people, and it will prolong their abortions,” said Upadhyay. “Then by the time they get back to the clinic, they’re seeking abortion later in pregnancy.”

Before the ruling, 19 states already restricted telehealth abortion care, limiting access to medication abortion. Nearly half of US adults were unsure whether medication abortion was currently legal in their state as of late-January, according to a survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation. Experts say that confusion will only be exacerbated.

“People are not going to be sure mifepristone or misoprostol in fact, is available. I think it’s going to be confusing,” said Aiken. “As people look around for options or feel unsure about their options, they may end up delaying [care].”

Source link

#safe #abortion #pill #compared #common #drugs #CNN

Colorectal cancer is rising among younger adults and scientists are racing to uncover why | CNN



CNN
 — 

Nikki Lawson received the shock of her life at age 35.

A couple of years ago, she noticed that her stomach often felt irritable, and she would get sudden urges to use the restroom, sometimes with blood in her stool. She even went to the hospital one day when her symptoms were severe, she said, and she was told it might be a stomach ulcer before being sent home.

“That was around the time when Chadwick Boseman, the actor, passed away. I remember watching him on the news and having the same symptoms,” Lawson said of the “Black Panther” star who died of colon cancer at age 43 in August 2020.

“But at that time, I was not thinking ‘this is something that I’m going through,’ ” she said.

Instead, Lawson thought changing her diet would help. She stopped eating certain red meats and ate more fruits and vegetables. She began losing a lot of weight, which she thought was the result of her new diet.

“But then I went for a physical,” Lawson said.

Her primary care physician recommended that she see a gastroenterologist immediately because she had low iron levels.

“When I went and I saw my gastro, she said, ‘I’m sorry, I have bad news. We see something. We sent it off to get testing. It looks like it is cancer.’ My whole world just kind of blanked out,” Lawson said. “I was 35, healthy, going about my day, raising my daughter, and to get a diagnosis like this, I was just so shocked.”

Lawson, who was diagnosed with stage III rectal cancer, is among a growing group of colon and rectal cancer patients in the United States who are diagnosed at a young age.

The share of colorectal cancer diagnoses among adults younger than 55 in the US has been rising since the 1990s, and no one knows why.

Researchers at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute are calling for more work to be done to understand, prevent and treat colorectal cancer at younger ages.

In a paper published last week in the journal Science, the researchers, Dr. Marios Giannakis and Dr. Kimmie Ng, outlined a way for scientists to accelerate their investigations into the puzzling rise of colorectal cancer among younger ages, calling for more specialized research centers to focus on younger patients with the disease and for diverse populations to be included in studies on early-onset colorectal cancer.

Their hope is that this work will help improve outcomes for young colorectal cancer patients like Lawson.

Among younger adults, ages 20 to 49, colorectal cancer is estimated to become the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States by 2030.

Lawson, now 36 and living in Palm Bay, Florida, with her 5-year-old daughter, is in remission and cancer-free.

The former middle school teacher had several surgeries and received radiation therapy and chemotherapy to treat her cancer. She is now being monitored closely by her doctors.

For other young people with colorectal cancer, “my words of hope would be to just stay strong. Just find that courage within yourself to say, ‘You know what, I’m going to fight this.’ And I just looked within myself,” Lawson said.

“I also have a very supportive family system, so they were definitely there for me. But it was very emotional,” she said of her cancer treatments.

“I remember crying through chemotherapy sessions and the medicine making you so weak, and my daughter was 4, and having to be strong for her,” she said. “My advice to any young person: If you see symptoms or you see something’s not right and you’re losing a lot of weight and not really trying to, go to see a doctor.”

Signs and symptoms of colorectal cancer include changes in bowel habits, rectal bleeding or blood in the stool, cramping or abdominal pain, weakness and fatigue, and weight loss.

A report released this month by the American Cancer Society shows that the proportion of colorectal cancer cases among adults younger than 55 increased from 11% in 1995 to 20% in 2019. Yet the factors driving that rise remain a mystery.

There’s probably more than just one cause, said Lawson’s surgeon, Dr. Steven Lee-Kong, chief of colorectal surgery at Hackensack University Medical Center in New Jersey.

He has noticed an increase in colorectal cancer patients in their 40s and 30s within his own practice. His youngest patient was 21 when she was diagnosed with rectal cancer.

“There is a phenomenon of decreasing overall colorectal cancer rates in the population in general, we think because of the increase in screening for particularly for older adults,” Lee-Kong said. “But that doesn’t really account for the overall increase in the number of patients younger than, say, 50 and 45 that are developing cancer.”

Some of the factors known to raise anyone’s risk of colorectal cancer are having a family history of the disease, having a certain genetic mutation, drinking too much alcohol, smoking cigarettes or being obese.

“They were established as risk factors in older cohorts of patients, but they do seem to be also associated with early-onset disease, and those are things like excess body weight, lack of physical activity, high consumption of processed meat and red meat, very high alcohol consumption,” said Rebecca Siegel, a cancer epidemiologist and senior scientific director of surveillance research at the American Cancer Society, who was lead author of this month’s report.

“But the data don’t support these specific factors as solely driving the trend,” she said. “So if you have excess body weight, you are at a higher risk of colorectal cancer in your 40s than someone who is average weight. That is true. But the excess risk is pretty small. So again, that is probably not what’s driving this increase, and it’s another reason to think that there’s something else going on.”

Many people who are being diagnosed at a younger age were not obese, including some high-profile cases, such as Broadway actor Quentin Oliver Lee, who died last year at 34 after being diagnosed with stage IV colon cancer.

“Anecdotally, in conferences that I’ve attended, that is the word on the street: that most of these patients are very healthy. They’re not obese; they’re very active,” Siegel said, which adds to the mystery.

“We know that excess weight increases your risk, and we know that we’ve had a big increase in body weight in this country,” she said. “And that is contributing to more cancer for a lot of cancers and also for colorectal cancer. But does it explain this trend that we’re seeing, this steep increase? No, it doesn’t.”

Yet scientists remain divided when it comes to just how much of a role those known risk factors – especially obesity – play in the rise of colorectal cancer among adults younger than 55.

Even though the cause of the rise of colorectal cancer in younger adults is “still not very well understood,” Dr. Subhankar Chakraborty argues that dietary and lifestyle factors could be playing larger roles than some would think.

“We know that smoking, alcohol, lack of physical activity, being overweight or obese, increased consumption of red meat – so basically, dietary factors and environmental and lifestyle factors – are likely playing a big role,” said Chakraborty, a gastroenterologist with The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center.

“There are also some other factors, such as the growing incidence of inflammatory bowel disease, that may also be playing a role, and I think the biggest factors is most likely the diet, the lifestyle and the environmental factors,” he said.

It has been difficult to pinpoint causes of the rise of cases in younger ages because, if someone has a polyp in their colon for example, it can take 10 to 15 years to develop into cancer, he says.

“During that, all the way from a polyp to the cancer stage, the person is exposed to a variety of things in their life. And to really pinpoint what is going on, we would need to follow specific individuals over time to really understand their dietary patterns, medications and weight changes,” Chakraborty said. “So that makes it really hard, because of the time that cancer actually takes to develop.”

Some researchers have been investigating ways in which the rise in colorectal cancer among younger adults may be connected to increases in childhood obesity in the US.

“The rise in young-onset colorectal cancer correlates with a doubling of the prevalence of childhood obesity over the last 30 years, now affecting 20% of those under age 20,” Dr. William Karnes, a gastroenterologist and director of high-risk colorectal cancer services at the UCI Health Digestive Health Institute in California, said in an email.

“However, other factors may exist,” he said, adding that he has noticed “an increasing frequency of being shocked” by discoveries of colorectal cancer in his younger patients.

There could be correlations between obesity in younger adults, the foods they eat and the increase in colorectal cancers for the young adult population, said Dr. Shane Dormady, a medical oncologist from El Camino Health in California who treats colorectal cancer patients.

“I think younger people are on average consuming less healthy food – fast food, processed snacks, processed sugars – and I think that those foods also contain higher concentrations of carcinogens and mutagens, in addition to the fact that they are very fattening,” Dormady said.

“It’s well-publicized that child, adolescent, young adult obesity is rampant, if not epidemic, in our country,” he said. “And whenever a person is at an unhealthy weight, especially at a young age, which is when the cells are most susceptible to DNA damage, it really starts the ball rolling in the wrong direction.”

Yet at the Center for Young Onset Colorectal and Gastrointestinal Cancers at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, researchers and physicians are not seeing a definite correlation between the rise in colorectal cancer among their younger adult patients and a rise in obesity, according to Dr. Robin Mendelsohn, gastroenterologist and co-director of the center, where scientists and doctors continue to work around the clock to solve this mystery.

“When we looked at our patients, the majority were more likely to be overweight and obese, but when we compare them to a national cohort without cancer, they’re actually less likely to be overweight and obese,” she said. “And anecdotally, a lot of the patients that we see are young and fit and don’t really fit the obesity profile.”

That leaves many oncologists scratching their heads.

Some scientists are also exploring whether genetic mutations that can raise someone’s risk for colorectal cancer have played a role in the rise of cases among younger adults – but the majority of these patients do not have them.

Karnes, of UCI Health, said “it is unlikely” that there has been an increase in the genetic mutations that raise the risk of colorectal cancer, “although, as expected, the percentage of colorectal cancers caused by such mutations, e.g., Lynch syndrome, is more common in people with young-onset colorectal cancer.”

Lynch syndrome is the most common cause of hereditary colorectal cancer, causing about 4,200 cases in the US per year. People with Lynch syndrome are more likely to get cancers at a younger age, before 50.

“In my practice and in the medical community, the oncologic community, I don’t think there’s any proof that genetic syndromes and gene mutations that patients are born with are becoming more frequent,” El Camino Health’s Dormady said. “I don’t think the inherent frequency of those mutations is going up.”

The tumors of younger colorectal cancer patients are very similar to those of older ones, said Mendelsohn at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.

“So then, the question is, if they’re biologically the same, why are we seeing this increasingly in younger people?” she said. “About 20% may have a genetic mutation, so the majority of patients do not have a family history or genetic predisposition.”

Therefore, Mendelsohn added, “it’s likely some kind of exposure, whether it be diet, medication, changing microbiome,” that is driving the rise in colorectal cancers in younger adults.

That rise “has been something that’s been on our radar, and it has been increasing since the 1990s,” Mendelsohn said. “And even though it is increasing, the numbers are still small. So it’s still a small population.”

Dormady, at El Camino Health, said he now sees more colorectal cancer patients in their early to mid-50s than he did 20 years ago, and he wonders whether it might be a result of colorectal cancer screening being easier to access and better at detecting cancers.

“The first thing to consider is that some of our diagnostic modalities are becoming better,” he said, especially because there are now many at-home colorectal cancer testing kits. Also, in 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force lowered the recommended age to start screening for colon and rectal cancers from 50 to 45.

“I think you have a subset of patients who are being screened earlier with colonoscopies; you have advancing technology where we can potentially detect tumor cell DNA in the stool sample, which is leading to earlier diagnosis. And sometimes that effect will skew statistics and make it look like the incidence is really on the rise, but deeper analysis shows you that part of that is due to earlier detection and more screening,” he said. “So that could be one facet of the equation.”

Overall, pinpointing what could be driving this surge in colorectal cancer diagnoses among younger ages will not only help scientists better understand cancer as a disease, it will help doctors develop personalized risk assessments for their younger patients, Ohio State University’s Chakraborty said.

“Because most of the people who go on to develop colorectal cancer really have no family history – no known family history of colon cancer – so they would really not be aware of their risk until they begin to develop symptoms,” he said.

“Having a personalized risk assessment tool that will take into account their lifestyle, their environmental factors, genetic factors – I think if we have that, then it would allow us hopefully, in the future, to provide some personalized recommendations on when a person should be screened for colorectal cancer and what should be the modality of screening based on their risk,” he said. “Younger adults tend to develop colon cancer mostly in the left side, whereas, as we get older, colon cancer tends to develop more on the right side. So there’s a little difference in how we could screen younger adults versus older adults.”

Source link

#Colorectal #cancer #rising #among #younger #adults #scientists #racing #uncover #CNN

Ozempic prescriptions can be easy to get online. Its popularity for weight loss is hurting those who need it most | CNN



CNN
 — 

Telehealth and social media are playing a significant role in driving demand for Ozempic, a prescription drug that treats Type 2 diabetes, experts told CNN. The current drug shortage has limited access for patients with diabetes who rely on it to control their blood sugar.

Digital health companies make medications like Ozempic easier to get by providing prescriptions online. Many advertise quick and easy — sometimes same-day — access.

“Anecdotally, it’s almost easier to get medication [via digital health companies],” said Dr. Disha Narang, endocrinologist and director of obesity medicine at Northwestern Medicine, Lake Forest Hospital. “But not always the safest.” People who put in average weights on the online intake forms were still offered the antidiabetic drug, Narang told CNN.

In part because of Ozempic’s popularity, the prescription weight loss drug market has grown significantly, according to MarketData Enterprises, an independent market research and consulting firm. The market surpassed forecasters’ expectations for 2022 and is expected to become a nearly $2 billion industry in 2023.

WeightWatchers is also tapping into the telehealth prescription drug space. Last week, the company bought telehealth subscription service Sequence, which helps connect patients to doctors who can prescribe weight loss and diabetes drugs.

“At the start of 2022, these companies weren’t marketing this stuff,” Narang said, noting advertising around Ozempic took off in 2022. “I think we really need to start questioning our ethics around this.”

There are few across-the-board requirements when it comes to digital health companies’ intake processes, Dr. Bree Holtz, an associate professor at Michigan State University studying telemedicine, told CNN. Once a patient fills out the required forms online, information gets transferred to an in-state provider who can write the prescription. Some companies require that the patient hop on a video or phone call with the provider — others don’t require either.

“It’s a little scary that you can just wake up and get these appointments in — or these pharmaceuticals — and you’re not being cared for,” said Holtz.

Telehealth has been a game changer in providing access to health care, particularly during the pandemic. And especially for people living in places where high-quality primary care is not available, direct to consumer telehealth services can help fill a gap, said Dr. Laurie Buis, associate professor in the Department of Family Medicine at the University of Michigan, whose research focuses on digital health.

When patients begin to seek selective treatment from selective providers, however, Buis says it opens the door to problems like fragmented care or abuse. Telehealth providers may not have access to a patient’s full medical history and may be less able to provide holistic care that a primary care physician otherwise could.

“I have no doubt that some of these services are doing a good job,” said Buis. “There are also services that don’t take it quite as seriously. And that’s of concern.”

The US Food and Drug Administration first announced that Ozempic was in shortage last August. Supply will likely be strained through mid-March, according to the FDA drug shortages database.

Ozempic prescriptions in the US reached an all-time high in the last week of February, with over 373,000 prescriptions filled, according to a J.P. Morgan analysis of IQVIA data shared with CNN. That’s an increase of 111%, compared with the same week in 2022.

Of these, more than half were new prescriptions, according to a CNN review of J.P. Morgan’s analysis.​​

With many patients relying on Ozempic for diabetes treatment, providers like Narang are scrambling to figure out what alternatives to put their patients on.

“We’re getting messages daily about patients not being able to get their own medication,” Narang said. “It’s been tough for patients and providers alike.”

Ozempic currently holds more than 40% of the US market share of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonists — a class of drugs that mimic an appetite-regulating hormone — according to analysis from J.P. Morgan. These drugs work by stimulating the release of insulin, which helps lower blood sugar. They also slow the passage of food through the gut.

Ozempic has grown quickly in popularity since it was first put on the market in 2018. The drug has safely and successfully been used to help diabetics improve blood sugar levels and put diabetes into remission, Narang told CNN. Ozempic is the most potent of all the GLP-1 medications, she said.

Behind the brand name Ozempic is the medication semaglutide. While Ozempic is used primarily to treat Type 2 diabetes, another drug by the name Wegovy — also semaglutide — is approved specifically for chronic weight management.

Although approved by the FDA in 2021, Wegovy was not readily available through most of last year, according to Narang, so people turned to Ozempic. According to the FDA drug shortages database, Wegovy was undersupplied starting at the end of last March but came back in stock earlier this year.

Social media buzz around the two drugs took off at the start of 2023. Celebrities shared their testimonies about how semaglutide helped them shed unwanted pounds. Elon Musk, for example, publicly credited Ozempic and Wegovy in part for his weight loss.

#Ozempic and #Wegovy have been “extremely popular” over the last few months on TikTok, according to company analytics.

The use of Ozempic and Wegovy for short-term weight loss has resulted in real consequences for patients who need the drugs most for diabetes treatment and chronic weight management, said Narang. For example, some insurance companies in the past have reportedly refused to cover Wegovy, one calling it a “vanity drug.”

Both drugs are intended for long-term use, not for short-term weight loss. Their appetite-regulating effects wear off quickly after you stop taking them.

“This is not meant to be a medication to take off your last five or 10 pounds to get ready for an event or something like that. It’s not for use of three or four weeks,” Narang said. “When we think about weight management, we’re thinking about the next 25 years of someone’s life.”



Source link

#Ozempic #prescriptions #easy #online #popularity #weight #loss #hurting #CNN

‘Am I dreaming?’: Double lung transplants save two people with late-stage cancer | CNN



CNN
 — 

Two people with stage IV lung cancer who had been told that they had only weeks or months to live are breathing freely after receiving double lung transplants, Northwestern Medicine in Chicago said Wednesday.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. The American Cancer Society estimates that over 127,000 Americans will die from the disease this year.

It is considered stage IV once additional tumors have developed in the lungs, aside from the primary tumor, or the cancer has spread to more organs.

Someone diagnosed with stage IV lung cancer has limited treatment options, Northwestern Medicine says. A double lung transplantation offers a potentially lifesaving option for some people with a poor prognosis, but doctors say there are specific criteria a lung cancer patient must meet, including that the cancer is contained within the lungs and the person has tried all other treatment options.

In 2020, 54-year-old Albert Khoury of Chicago received a devastating lung cancer diagnosis.

Khoury, a cement finisher for the Chicago Department of Transportation, began to have back pain, sneezing and chills, along with coughing up blood, according to Northwestern Medicine. It was near the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, so at first, he thought he had coronavirus-related symptoms.

He was diagnosed with stage I lung cancer soon after.

Because of the pandemic, Khoury did not begin treatment until July 2020. At that point, the cancer had progressed to stage II and was continuing to grow, eventually reaching stage IV. He was told to consider hospice, special care for people near the end of their lives that focuses on comfort and support.

“I had a couple weeks to live,” Khoury said in a video released by the hospital. “Not that much time.”

His sister suggested that he reach out to Northwestern Medicine about the possibility of a double lung transplant.

“I need new lungs. That is the only hope to live,” Khoury said he told his doctor.

He met with an oncologist at Northwestern Medicine, who told him he should try additional treatments first. But not too long after, he was admitted to the intensive care unit with pneumonia and sepsis.

As his health declined, the oncologists began considering the rarely used procedure.

“His lungs were filled with cancer cells, and day by day, his oxygen was dropping,” said Dr. Young Chae, a medical oncologist at Northwestern Medicine who helped treat Khoury.

Transplant is typically considered for people with some form of lung cancer that has not spread to other parts of the body and for those who have tried all other treatment options and have limited time to live, according to Dr. Ankit Bharat, chief of thoracic surgery at the Northwestern Medicine Canning Thoracic Institute, who helped treat Khoury.

William Dahut, chief scientific officer at the American Cancer Society, also noted the importance of ensuring that cancer has not spread to other parts of the body before doing a transplant.

“There would need to be as much certainty as possible that the cancer is limited to the lungs, so whatever sort of extensive screening tests should be done … to ensure that there are no cancer cells outside of the lungs,” said Dahut, who was not involved in the care of either Northwestern patient.

The oncologists decided Khoury was eligible for the procedure. In September 2021, he spent about seven hours in surgery.

“Surgeons had to be extremely meticulous to not let trillions of cancer cells from the old lungs spill out into Khoury’s chest cavity or into his blood stream,” Northwestern Medicine noted in a news release.

The surgery is not without risk, Bharat said. In people with late-stage cancers, there is always a chance of it returning after the procedure.

“There is certainly the risk of potentially being in a worse off situation than they were,” he said. “So you go through a big surgery, and then you could very quickly have the cancer come back.”

Another risk is the treatment needed after a transplant, Dahut said.

All lung transplant recipients have to take medications to weaken their immune systems, which helps reduce the possibility of their body rejecting the organ – but also decreases its ability to fight off infection, according to the National Cancer Institute.

“Drugs that actually suppress your immune system put you at risk for infection afterwards but could even potentially put you at risk for second cancers afterwards,” Dahut said.

However, 18 months later, Khoury has not had any complications and is back to work.

His doctor showed him an X-ray of his chest with no signs of cancer. “When I saw that X-ray, I believed him,” Khoury said. “My body is in my hands now.”

The procedure was put to the test again last year, this time in a 64-year-old Minnesota woman.

Tannaz Ameli, a retired nurse from Minneapolis, had a persistent cough for several months. Her doctors did a chest X-ray and diagnosed her with pneumonia.

The illness lingered until she was told she had stage IV lung cancer in January 2022.

“There was no hope for my life at that point. They gave me … three months,” Ameli said in a video released by Northwestern Medicine.

She went through unsuccessful chemotherapy treatments and was told to consider hospice.

“I had no hope. I was ready for my life to end,” she said.

But her husband reached out to Northwestern Medicine about the option of a transplant. The oncologists found that Ameli fit their criteria, and she received a double lung transplant in July.

When she was told the procedure had made her cancer-free, she wondered, ” ‘Am I dreaming, sitting here? Can it happen?’ And it did happen.”

Ameli hasn’t had any complications, and she said the procedure has given her a new perspective on life.

“Every morning when I open my eyes, I just can’t believe it,” Ameli said. “Life has a different meaning now.”

Double lung transplants for cancer are rare due to the concern that the cancer may come back, Bharat said.

Historically, the surgery required sequential transplantations, but they are looking to alter the approach to lower the risk of recurrence, he said.

“Typically, what happens in a double lung transplant procedure is, we take one lung out, put the new one in, then take the second lung out and put the second lung in,” he said. “The concern is that when you take one lung out and put a new lung, the other lung is still attached, and they could cross-contaminate. … You could inadvertently have the cancer cells spread into the bloodstream.”

If cancer cells cross-contaminate or enter the bloodstream, there is a higher risk of cancer coming back.

Bharat and his team took a different approach with Khoury and Ameli: They opened the chest cavity and did a full heart and lung bypass.

“Essentially, what that means is, we don’t let any blood go through the heart and the lungs and bypass all of that,” Bharat said. “That allows us to then stop the blood flow to the lungs, which will prevent any cancer cells from going from the lung into the bloodstream.”

The surgeons gave Khoury and Ameli lung-shaped friendship necklaces Wednesday to mark their success.

Source link

#dreaming #Double #lung #transplants #save #people #latestage #cancer #CNN