BioWorld. Link to homepage.

Clarivate
  • BioWorld
  • BioWorld MedTech
  • BioWorld Asia
  • BioWorld Science
  • Data Snapshots
    • BioWorld
    • BioWorld MedTech
  • Special reports
    • Aging
    • Biosimilars
    • Artificial intelligence
    • Coronavirus
    • IVDs on the rise
    • Radiopharmaceuticals
    • Science '22 in Review
    • Top Biopharma Trends of 2022
    • Top Med-tech Trends of 2022
    • Premium reports
      • BioWorld Financings Reports
      • Disease Incidence & Prevalence Summaries

BioWorld. Link to homepage.

  • sign in
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Subscribe
BioWorld - Thursday, September 28, 2023
Home » Blogs » BioWorld MedTech Perspectives » ACC 2016: All aboard the TAVR train

BioWorld MedTech Perspectives
BioWorld MedTech Perspectives RSS FeedRSS

BioWorld MedTech

ACC 2016: All aboard the TAVR train

April 5, 2016
By Mark McCarty
No Comments

TAVR tempest now arriving
The latest TAVR tempests arrive

The Windy City really lived up to its name during the course of ACC 2016, didn't it? It was also interesting to hear the recording on the subway stating that gambling is not allowed on the trains. Who knew?

ACC 2016 provided a lot of gist for the scribbling class, including some noise about operator volume requirements for TAVR devices. There was also pressure from physicians on FDA to approve the latest generation of devices based on data from other than the classic randomized trial, which in the past may or may not have had any effect. In both cases, the question may be who is and who should be driving these decisions.

When enough is not enough

As those in the interventional cardiology business are aware, hospitals that want to practice TAVR must have an interventional cardiologist and a cardiovascular surgeon with 20 such procedures under their belts in any 12-month period if they want Medicare payment. There was some question about whether this level suffices, given that some data emerged during ACC 2016 indicating that the device performs better even after the operators have done 100 cases.

As interesting as that discussion is, I am inclined to think that CMS did not just pluck that number out of its hat. The agency had a fair amount of clinical trial data on which to base that set point, so one has to imagine there was a reason to pick 20.

On the other hand, physicians working at any institution doing a substantial amount of surgical valve replacement will probably handle a lot more than 20 such procedures annually. For a lot of centers practicing this device type, the question probably seems a bit absurd.

There are undoubtedly exceptions, however. It is probably safe to say that many hospitals that barely make it to 20 a year are located in areas where there are few hospitals to choose from. If that's the case, raising the minimum number of procedures might force some very sick people to travel a lot farther for a procedure they need just to survive to next month.

In the case of those who are at high risk from surgeries or who simply are not candidates for surgery, is it really humane to force them to drive several hundred miles farther just so everyone can feel good about raising the minimum volume to higher than 20 procedures?

I think we all know the answer, don't we?

Regulating the regulator?

During last year's ACC gathering, Jeff Popma needled FDA about approving the Sapien 3 device by Edwards Lifesciences for inoperable and high-risk patients without putting the company through a full-blown randomized, controlled trial slog. This year, the same argument was made in reference to this valve in an intermediate-risk population.

FDA approved the Sapien 3 in June, 2015, about three months after last year's ACC meeting, but that doesn't mean the agency was responding to the pressure it was feeling from doctors. Still, it will be interesting to see how the agency handles this latest predicament. After all, much of the data in support of this notion is derived from a study that used propensity matching to compare a single-arm study of the Sapien 3 to surgical valve patients who were enrolled in the Partner 2A study.

This can't sit well with a lot of people at FDA, but we all know that doctors have a lot of pull with government agencies. Still, it's tough to gamble any serious money on the outcome here. After all, someone at FDA might not like the perception that doctors are driving the FDA train.

You must login or register in order to post a comment.

Report Abusive Comment

Popular Stories

  • Today's news in brief

    BioWorld
    BioWorld briefs for Sept. 27, 2023.
  • Today's news in brief

    BioWorld MedTech
    BioWorld MedTech briefs for September 27, 2023.
  • 3D illustration of cancer in crosshairs

    Dato data lack means upside for Gilead; Padcev 'must-win' does win

    BioWorld
    Upbeat phase III findings outweighed less encouraging late-stage trial news, as big pharma provided a mixed bag of cancer findings – with one data batch to form...
  • Illustration of Alzheimer’s in the brain.

    Study identifies cause of death for Alzheimer’s neurons

    BioWorld
    By creating a new mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease that better recapitulated how the disease plays out in humans, investigators at KU Leuven have gained new...
  • Apple Computer Inc. logo

    Apple scores win over Masimo for patents for physiological detectors, but ITC decision awaits

    BioWorld MedTech
    Apple Inc., of Cupertino, Calif., has prevailed over Masimo Corp., in a ruling at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, an outcome that invalidated...
BioFuture ad

BioWorld Premium

Enjoy extended coverage for the most complete market view with BioWorld, BioWorld MedTech, and BioWorld Asia in a single, easy to access subscription.

Subscribe
  • BioWorld
    • Today's news
    • Analysis and data insight
    • Clinical
    • Data Snapshots
    • Deals and M&A
    • Financings
    • Newco news
    • Opinion
    • Regulatory
    • Science
  • BioWorld MedTech
    • Today's news
    • Clinical
    • Data Snapshots
    • Deals and M&A
    • Financings
    • Newco news
    • Opinion
    • Regulatory
    • Science
  • BioWorld Asia
    • Today's news
    • Analysis and data insight
    • Australia
    • China
    • Clinical
    • Deals and M&A
    • Financings
    • Newco news
    • Regulatory
    • Science
  • BioWorld Science
    • Today's news
    • Biomarkers
    • Cancer
    • Conferences
    • Endocrine/Metabolic
    • Immune
    • Infection
    • Neurology/Psychiatric
    • Patents
  • More
    • About
    • Advertise with BioWorld
    • Archives
    • Article reprints and permissions
    • Contact us
    • Cookie policy
    • Copyright notice
    • Data methodology
    • Podcasts
    • Privacy policy
    • Share your news with BioWorld
    • Staff
    • Terms of use
Follow Us

Copyright ©2023. All Rights Reserved. Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing