vol1 - Page 364
Page 364
Previous ,
Next ,
Original Image
Return to Index
DEA is confusing the hoped-for-outcome .(retention of
visual function) with the treatment needed to achieve that
outcome (reduction of intraocular pressure)° While DEA concedes
most glaucoma therapies became accepted through mclinical
experiences _._64/ the Agency attempts to sustain its nnew#
• ...... indication by pointing to the IND/NDA efficacy-based evaluation
of timolol. Buts is timolol capable, in DEA_s languages of
#sustain[ing] the lowered pressure and preserv[ing] visual
function for the patlent s lifetime#?
Government witness Keith Green testifies timoiol only
helps 60% of_the patients who use it. 165/ Since.timoloi cannot
achieve the perfection of result demanded by DEA's newly
fabricated standard does DEA consider timolol to have no
naccepted medicai use in treatmentS?
.......
No currently mappr0ved w glaucoma therapy tanpromise to
nsustain the lowered pressure and prese_re visual function for
164/ DEA Brief _ 70_ at 43:
mother conventional glaucoma medications
have proven their efficacy through years of
clinical experience. The miotics,
epinephrine compounds and carbonic anhydrase
inhibitors have been proven effective in
lowering intraocular pressure and preserving
visual function.
___ a_, ACT Brief .at 133_135; Cross-examination of
Dr. Richard North at 7_99 & 7-I00; Cross-examination of Dr. John
Merritt at Tr° 10-125.
Dr. Merritt directly challenges DEASs assertion that the
miotics0 epinephrine and carbinoc anhydrase inhibitors have been
subjected to efficacy tests to determine if they Wmaintain
visual field° _ See Cross_examination of Dr. John Merritt at 10_lS°?o
165/. Cross-examination of Keith Greens Ph.D° at 9_77o
- 58 -
Previous ,
Next ,
Return to Index