How one scientist averted a national health crisis Andrea Tone

In the fall of 1960,
Frances Oldham Kelsey

was one of the Food
and Drug Administration’s newest recruits.

Before the year was out,

she would begin a fight that would
save thousands of lives,

though no one knew it at the time.

Although she was new to the FDA,
Kelsey was no novice as a scientist.

After graduating
from high school at age 15,

she enrolled
at McGill University in Montreal

and earned both undergraduate
and master’s degrees in pharmacology.

From there, she applied
for a research post

at the University of Chicago’s
pharmacology department.

Her acceptance letter was addressed
to Mr. Oldham.

Kelsey later joked that had her name
been Elizabeth or Mary Jane,

her career might have ended there.

Fortunately, it didn’t.

She earned her doctorate
in pharmacology

and accepted Chicago’s invitation
to stay as faculty,

where she undertook pioneering
research on drugs and fetal safety.

In 1950, she earned an MD,
her fourth and final degree.

By the time she joined the FDA,

Frances Kelsey was one of the most
educated, experienced scientists around.

Yet, as the newest member
of the team,

Kelsey was assigned what everyone
thought would be an easy review:

an application from the
US drug company Merrell

to sell a drug called thalidomide.

Thalidomide was a sedative
developed in Germany

that was already being widely used
in dozens of countries

to treat insomnia and workplace stress.

Thalidomide’s anti-nausea properties

also made it a popular remedy for pregnant
women with morning sickness.

Reviewing Merrell’s application,

Kelsey found its data on thalidomide’s
absorption and toxicity inadequate.

Today, the FDA classifies drugs based
on their safety for a fetus.

But in 1960, many experts believed
that the placental barrier

shielded a fetus from harm.

Kelsey’s earlier animal-based research

demonstrated the opposite:

drugs could pass from mother
to fetus through the placenta.

Like other drug companies at this time,

Merrell had not tested its drug
on pregnant animals.

Kelsey later said Merrell’s evidence
for thalidomide’s safety seemed

“more like testimonials than
the results of well-designed studies.”

Kelsey rejected Merrell’s application

and asked them to submit a second
backed by better evidence.

Her FDA colleagues
supported this decision.

Merrell had expected a quick,
affirmative reply

so it could launch thalidomide
for the holiday season,

when sedative sales soar.

Instead of supplying Kelsey
with the data she requested

they first tried to convince her
to approve the drug

over a series of calls and visits.

When these failed to sway her,

Merrell executives complained

that stubborn and nit-picking
Kelsey was the problem,

not thalidomide.

The FDA backed Kelsey,

forcing Merrell to file
another application,

and another,

and another.

As Kelsey reviewed
and rejected each new application,

news of thalidomide’s adverse
side effects began to surface.

Doctors reported cases of nerve damage
in early 1961,

and by fall,
they’d unmasked a more horrible truth.

Thalidomide, widely used by pregnant
women, caused severe birth defects.

Thousands of babies died in utero,

and tens of thousands more
were born with extra appendages,

shorter limbs,

or no limbs at all.

In November 1961, thalidomide
was pulled from the German market.

Nonetheless, Merrell continued trying
to get it approved in the US

for several months before withdrawing
their sixth and final application.

While Kelsey wasn’t the only scientist
to identify the risks of thalidomide,

she sounded the alarm

that kept it off the multi-billion-dollar
American drug market.

As public awareness
of the thalidomide tragedy grew,

the quiet scientist
became a media sensation.

Headlines in newspapers
and magazines heralded her heroism

while a smiling President John F. Kennedy

presented her an award
on the White House lawn.

After the thalidomide scare,

Congress passed laws that expanded
the FDA’s authority

and toughened requirements
for new drug applications.

Kelsey was tapped to head
the agency’s drug investigation branch.

Working at the FDA in
different capacities into her 90s,

Kelsey was able to witness the changes
her actions helped inspire.

Her visibility may have dimmed since,
but her legacy endures.

Privileging facts over opinions,
and patience over shortcuts,

she made evidence-based medicine
the foundation of reforms

that continue to protect people today.

1960 年秋天,
弗朗西斯·奥尔德姆·凯尔西 (Frances Oldham Kelsey)

是美国食品
和药物管理局的最新成员之一。

在这一年结束之前,

她将开始一场可以
挽救数千人生命的战斗,

尽管当时没有人知道。

虽然她是 FDA 的新手,但
凯尔西作为一名科学家并不是新手。

15 岁高中毕业后,

她就读
于蒙特利尔的麦吉尔大学

,获得
药理学本科和硕士学位。

从那里,她申请

了芝加哥大学
药理学系的研究职位。

她的录取通知书是
寄给奥尔德姆先生的。

凯尔西后来开玩笑说,如果她的名字
是伊丽莎白或玛丽简,

她的职业生涯可能就到此为止了。

幸运的是,它没有。

她获得了
药理学博士学位,

并接受了芝加哥的邀请
留校任教,

在那里她进行了
药物和胎儿安全方面的开创性研究。

1950 年,她获得了医学博士学位,这是
她的第四个也是最后一个学位。

到她加入 FDA 时,

弗朗西斯·凯尔西 (Frances Kelsey) 是
周围受过最多教育、经验最丰富的科学家之一。

然而,作为团队的最新
成员,

Kelsey 被分配到了每个人都
认为很容易审查的任务:

美国制药公司 Merrell

提出的销售一种名为沙利度胺的药物的申请。

沙利度胺是
德国开发的一种镇静剂

,已
在数十个国家广泛

用于治疗失眠和工作压力。

沙利度胺的抗恶心特性

也使其成为
孕吐孕妇的流行药物。

回顾 Merrell 的申请,

Kelsey 发现其关于沙利度胺
吸收和毒性的数据不足。

今天,FDA 根据药物
对胎儿的安全性对药物进行分类。

但在 1960 年,许多专家
认为胎盘屏障

保护胎儿免受伤害。

凯尔西早期的基于动物的研究

证明了相反的情况:

药物可以通过胎盘从母亲
传给胎儿。

与此时的其他制药公司一样,

Merrell 尚未
在怀孕动物身上测试其药物。

凯尔西后来说,梅雷尔
关于沙利度胺安全性的证据似乎

“更像是证明,而不是
精心设计的研究结果。”

Kelsey 拒绝了 Merrell 的申请,

并要求他们提交第二
份有更好证据支持的申请。

她的 FDA 同事
支持这一决定。

Merrell 曾期待得到快速、
肯定的答复,

以便

在镇静剂销量飙升的假日季节推出沙利度胺。

他们没有向凯尔西
提供她要求的数据,

而是首先试图通过一系列电话和访问来说服
她批准该药物

当这些未能动摇她时,

Merrell 的高管们抱怨

说,固执和吹毛求疵的
凯尔西是问题所在,

而不是沙利度胺。

FDA 支持 Kelsey,

迫使 Merrell 提交
另一份申请,

又一份,

又一份。

随着凯尔西审查
并拒绝了每个新申请,

有关沙利度胺不良
副作用的消息开始浮出水面。

医生在 1961 年初报告了神经损伤病例

到了秋天,
他们揭露了一个更可怕的真相。

孕妇广泛使用的沙利度胺会
导致严重的出生缺陷。

数以千计的婴儿在子宫内死亡,

还有数以万计
的婴儿出生时有额外的附肢、

更短的四肢

或根本没有四肢。

1961年11月,沙利度胺
从德国市场撤出。

尽管如此,Merrell 继续
试图在美国获得批准

几个月,然后撤回了
他们的第六次也是最后一次申请。

虽然凯尔西并不是唯一
一位发现沙利度胺风险的科学家,

但她敲响了警钟

,使其远离了价值数十亿美元的
美国药品市场。

随着公众
对沙利度胺悲剧的认识不断提高,

这位安静的科学家
引起了媒体的轰动。

报纸
和杂志上的头条新闻预示着她的英雄主义,

而面带微笑的约翰·肯尼迪总统则

在白宫草坪上为她颁奖。

在沙利度胺恐慌之后,

国会通过了法律,扩大
了 FDA 的权力

并加强了
对新药申请的要求。

凯尔西被任命
为该机构毒品调查部门的负责人。 Kelsey 在

90 多岁时以不同的身份在 FDA 工作,她

亲眼目睹
了她的行为所激发的变化。

从那以后,她的知名度可能有所下降,
但她的遗产仍然存在。

她将事实置于观点之上,将
耐心置于捷径之上,

她使循证医学
成为

当今继续保护人们的改革的基础。