Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 3/2013

01-03-2013 | Review

Benefit-risk paradigm for clinical trial design of obesity devices: FDA proposal

Authors: Herbert Lerner, Joyce Whang, Rebecca Nipper

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 3/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Diet and exercise, except in controlled circumstances, have not been shown to provide effective and prolonged weight loss for the majority of those who are obese. Several older drugs intended to reduce weight have been withdrawn from the market, and the new drugs show only modest weight loss. Surgical intervention, specifically procedures that alter the normal gastrointestinal anatomy, does provide prolonged periods of sustained weight loss, with rebound weight gain over time. A variety of medical devices to assist in weight reduction have been studied, but only two are legally marketed devices for obesity. The authors propose a new paradigm for devices intended to treat obesity, based on a benefit-risk determination, with the hope to provide sponsors an a priori tool for systematic assessment of the risks associated with the devices intended for treatment of obesity and to suggest appropriate levels of benefit for devices with different risk levels. The paradigm is not intended to determine the class of a device from a regulatory perspective. This approach was conceived at a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) co-sponsored workshop in October, 2011 and formally presented to an FDA advisory panel for discussion in May 2012.
Literature
3.
go back to reference Appel LJ, Clark JM, Yeh HC et al (2011) Comparative effectiveness of weight-loss interventions in clinical practice. N Engl J Med 365:1959–1968PubMedCrossRef Appel LJ, Clark JM, Yeh HC et al (2011) Comparative effectiveness of weight-loss interventions in clinical practice. N Engl J Med 365:1959–1968PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Bogers RP, Bemelmans WJ, Hoogenveen RT et al (2007) Association of overweight with increased risk of coronary heart disease partly independent of blood pressure and cholesterol levels: a meta-analysis of 21 cohort studies including more than 300,000 persons. Arch Intern Med 167:1720–1728PubMedCrossRef Bogers RP, Bemelmans WJ, Hoogenveen RT et al (2007) Association of overweight with increased risk of coronary heart disease partly independent of blood pressure and cholesterol levels: a meta-analysis of 21 cohort studies including more than 300,000 persons. Arch Intern Med 167:1720–1728PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Crémieux PY, Ledoux S, Clerici C et al (2010) The impact of bariatric surgery on comorbidities and medication use among obese patients. Obes Surg 20:861–870PubMedCrossRef Crémieux PY, Ledoux S, Clerici C et al (2010) The impact of bariatric surgery on comorbidities and medication use among obese patients. Obes Surg 20:861–870PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Eckel RH, Krauss RM (1998) American heart association call to action: obesity as a major risk factor for coronary heart disease. Circulation 97:2099–2100PubMedCrossRef Eckel RH, Krauss RM (1998) American heart association call to action: obesity as a major risk factor for coronary heart disease. Circulation 97:2099–2100PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Kit BK, Ogden CL (2012) Prevalence of obesity and trends in the distribution of body mass index among U.S. adults, 1999–2010. JAMA 307:491–497PubMedCrossRef Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Kit BK, Ogden CL (2012) Prevalence of obesity and trends in the distribution of body mass index among U.S. adults, 1999–2010. JAMA 307:491–497PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Guh DP, Zhang W, Bansback N et al (2009) The incidence of comorbidities related to obesity and overweight: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health 9:88PubMedCrossRef Guh DP, Zhang W, Bansback N et al (2009) The incidence of comorbidities related to obesity and overweight: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health 9:88PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Moore LL, Visioni AJ, Qureshi MM et al (2005) Weight loss in overweight adults and the long-term risk of hypertension: the Framingham study. Arch Intern Med 165:1298–1303PubMedCrossRef Moore LL, Visioni AJ, Qureshi MM et al (2005) Weight loss in overweight adults and the long-term risk of hypertension: the Framingham study. Arch Intern Med 165:1298–1303PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (1998) Clinical guidelines on the identification, evaluation, and treatment of overweight and obesity in adults: the evidence report. Obes Res 6(Suppl 2):51S–209S National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (1998) Clinical guidelines on the identification, evaluation, and treatment of overweight and obesity in adults: the evidence report. Obes Res 6(Suppl 2):51S–209S
11.
go back to reference Nguyen NT, Magno CP, Lane KT et al (2008) Association of hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and metabolic syndrome with obesity: findings from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1999 to 2004. J Am Coll Surg 207:928–934PubMedCrossRef Nguyen NT, Magno CP, Lane KT et al (2008) Association of hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and metabolic syndrome with obesity: findings from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1999 to 2004. J Am Coll Surg 207:928–934PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Prospective Studies Collaboration, Whitlock G, Lewington S, Sherliker P et al (2009) Body-mass index and cause-specific mortality in 900,000 adults: collaborative analyses of 57 prospective studies. Lancet 373:1083–1096PubMedCrossRef Prospective Studies Collaboration, Whitlock G, Lewington S, Sherliker P et al (2009) Body-mass index and cause-specific mortality in 900,000 adults: collaborative analyses of 57 prospective studies. Lancet 373:1083–1096PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Tice JA, Karliner L, Walsh J, Petersen AJ, Feldman MD (2008) Gastric banding or bypass? A systematic review comparing the two most popular bariatric procedures. Am J Med 121:885–893PubMedCrossRef Tice JA, Karliner L, Walsh J, Petersen AJ, Feldman MD (2008) Gastric banding or bypass? A systematic review comparing the two most popular bariatric procedures. Am J Med 121:885–893PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Tuomilehto J, Lindstrom J, Eriksson JG et al (2001) Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study Group. N Engl J Med 344:1343–1350PubMedCrossRef Tuomilehto J, Lindstrom J, Eriksson JG et al (2001) Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study Group. N Engl J Med 344:1343–1350PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Weichman K, Ren C, Kurian M, Heekoung AY, Casciano R, Stern L, Fielding G (2011) The effectiveness of adjustable gastric banding: a retrospective 6-year U.S. follow-up study. Surg Endosc 25:397–403PubMedCrossRef Weichman K, Ren C, Kurian M, Heekoung AY, Casciano R, Stern L, Fielding G (2011) The effectiveness of adjustable gastric banding: a retrospective 6-year U.S. follow-up study. Surg Endosc 25:397–403PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Wing RR, Lang W, Wadden TA et al (2011) Look AHEAD Research Group. Benefits of modest weight loss in improving cardiovascular risk factors in overweight and obese individuals with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 34:1481–1486PubMedCrossRef Wing RR, Lang W, Wadden TA et al (2011) Look AHEAD Research Group. Benefits of modest weight loss in improving cardiovascular risk factors in overweight and obese individuals with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 34:1481–1486PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Benefit-risk paradigm for clinical trial design of obesity devices: FDA proposal
Authors
Herbert Lerner
Joyce Whang
Rebecca Nipper
Publication date
01-03-2013
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 3/2013
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2724-3

Other articles of this Issue 3/2013

Surgical Endoscopy 3/2013 Go to the issue