Sólo 100 de 100.000 aplicaciones de salud han sido revisadas por la FDA, según ha denunciado un grupo de expertos en derecho sanitario, qu eha pedido más regulación en este campo. Se trata de un mercado cuyo valor se estima en 27.000 millones de dólares para 2017 y en el que pueden encontrarse aplicaciones que tienen consecuencias para la salud de los pacientes, según advierten estos expertos de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad Southern Methodist de Estados Unidos. El problema, aseguran, es que muchos pacientes creen que al encontrar la aplicación en una fuente de confianza, como la tienda de iTunes o Google Play, es segura. La realidad es que hay errores, incluso en aplicaciones de farmacéuticas, como el que cometió un laboratorio con las dosis de insulina.
Only 1 in 1000 mHealth Apps Have been Regulated by FDA
by Gabriel Perna
A trio of health law experts have advocated for more regulation and oversight of the mobile health (mHealth) application industry, saying that only 100 of 100,000 mHealth apps have been cleared by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
The researchers, led by Nathan Cortez, the Southern Methodist University (SMU) Dedham School of Law associate dean of research, argue that an under-regulated mHealth industry would create a "Wild West" market. They say that additional FDA funding and technical expertise on how to regulate mHealthproducts is necessary.
“Most consumers take mobile health app claims at face value, and think that because they’re available through a trusted retailer like the iTunes Store, they must have been reviewed by the FDA, which isn’t usually the case,” Cortez said in a statement.
The mHealth app industry is booming, the researchers note, citing a study that predicts revenue from these apps will earn $26 billion in 2017. This makes it necessary, they argue, for it to be regulated. Many of the products, Cortez said, cannot fulfill the promises they allege and others make errors that could harm patients. He cites several examples in the research, including Sanofi Aventis’ 2012 recall of a diabetes app that miscalculated insulin dosages.
“The conventional wisdom is that FDA regulation will stifle innovation, and that’s a very short-term way to think about this,” Cortez said. “Most Silicon Valley firms aren’t used to much federal regulation, and Internet technologies have been subject to very little federal oversight.”
Read the source article at SMU Dedman School of Law
BOOMING MOBILE HEALTH APP MARKET NEEDS ROBUST FDA OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE CONSUMER SAFETY, CONFIDENCE
Health Law Experts in July 24 New England Journal of Medicine
Download .PDF of full article: Regulation of Mobile Health Technologies
Dallas (SMU) — Smart phones and mobile devices are on the cusp of revolutionizing health care, armed with mobile health (“mHealth”) apps capable of providing everything from cardiac measurements to sonograms.
While tremendous potential exists to broaden access to medical treatment and control costs, several health law experts say in a just-published New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) report that more oversight is needed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ensure consumer confidence and safety. Out of some 100,000 mHealth apps on the market, only about 100 have been cleared by the FDA, while opponents see the FDA as deterrents to innovation — and profits.
“Consumers will be spending a lot of money on these products, and venture capital is flying into the industry,” says the article’s lead author, SMU Dedman School of Law Associate Dean of Research Nathan Cortez, adding that by 2017 mHealth apps are expected earn $26 billion— up from $2.4 billion in 2013.
The FDA needs “additional funding and in-house technical expertise to oversee the ongoing flood of mHealth products,” the authors note. An under-regulated mobile health industry could create “a Wild West” market, says Cortez, who has conducted extensive research into FDA regulation of mobile health technologies.
“Most consumers take mobile health app claims at face value, and think that because they’re available through a trusted retailer like the iTunes Store, they must have been reviewed by the FDA, which isn’t usually the case,” Cortez says.
Cortez, who also serves as an associate professor in SMU’s Dedman School of Law, co-wrote the NEJM article with Harvard Law School Professor I. Glenn Cohen, faculty director of the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology & Bioethics and author of Human Subjects Research Regulation: Perspectives on the Future (MIT Press, 2014) andAaron S. Kesselheim, Associate Professor of Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital/Harvard Medical School.
“Although the vast majority of mHealth products are very low-risk, some apps make promises they can’t fulfill, and others make errors that could harm patients,” Cortez notes, pointing out that life-threatening technical mistakes are not only possible – they also have occurred.
One of several examples cited in the study includes Sanofi Aventis’ 2012 recall of a diabetes app that miscalculated insulin dosages.
Several Congressional bills have been proposed to strengthen FDA jurisdiction over mHealth products, with one proposing the creation of a new Office of Wireless Health Technology within the administration, the article notes. Meanwhile, more restrictive bills also have been introduced to keep the FDA from regulating “clinical software” or “applying a complex regulatory framework could inhibit future growth and innovation in this promising market.”
“The conventional wisdom is that FDA regulation will stifle innovation, and that’s a very short-term way to think about this,” Cortez says. “Most Silicon Valley firms aren’t used to much federal regulation, and Internet technologies have been subject to very little federal oversight.”
If dangerous errors and disproven product benefits are allowed to proliferate, “some very useful products will be undermined by widespread consumer distrust,” Cortez contends.
“We’re trying to push lawmakers to empower the FDA, not hamstring it,” he says. “Clarity will help the industry create products more helpful than harmful.”
To speak with Professor Nathan Cortez, please contact him at email@example.com or call Denise Gee at firstname.lastname@example.org, 214-768-7658 (office) or 214-274-0888 (cell).
SMU is a nationally ranked private university in Dallas founded 100 years ago. Today, SMU enrolls nearly 11,000 students who benefit from the academic opportunities and international reach of seven degree-granting schools.
SMU Dedman School of Law was founded in 1925 and named Dedman School of Law in 2001 in honor of Dallas benefactors Nancy and Robert H. Dedman, Sr., and their family. SMU Dedman Law offers both a full-time, J.D. program, and a part-time evening J.D. program; two joint degree programs, J.D./M.B.A. and J.D/M.A. in economics; four graduate degree programs, LL.M. program for foreign law school graduates, LL.M. in Taxation, general LL.M., and an S.J.D. program. The law school enjoys a national and international reputation of distinction, with graduates that have distinguished themselves as global leaders in law, business and government, and as prominent members of the judiciary.