Skip to Main Content

MEDCAC Meeting 9/22/2010 - On Label and Off-Label Use of Bone Morphogenetic Proteins (BMPs)

Select the ’Print Record’, ‘Add to Basket’ or ‘Email Record’ buttons to print the record, to add it to your basket or to email the record.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has called this meeting to consider the currently available evidence regarding the clinical benefits and harms of on-label and off -label use of BMPs. More than 20 BMPs have been identified, but only BMPs -2, -4, -6 and -7 have been shown to have significant osteogenic properties. The main physiologic role of BMP is to promote differentiation of mesenchymal cells into chrondrocytes and osteoblasts, to promote differentiation of osteoprogenitors into osteoblasts, and to influence skeletal pattern formation.

Human BMPs are now produced using recombinant DNA technology. Currently, two recombinant BMPs have some form of FDA approval and are commercially available in the United States: rhBMP-2 and rhBMP-7. The on-label and off -label use of BMPs has rapidly grown since becoming clinically available in 2001. There are reports stating that up to 85% of BMP use is for off-label indications, mostly in the spine. There have also been a number of reports of adverse events associated with the use of BMPs.

June 17, 2010

CMS announces MEDCAC meeting.

Those interested can register at

July 28, 2010

Posted FR notice, questions to panel and appendix.

August 25, 2010

We will be broadcasting the meeting via Webinar. You must register for the Webinar portion of the meeting at (Updated Link) by 5 p.m. EDT, Friday, September 17, 2010.

September 10, 2010

September 20, 2010

September 24, 2010

Posted scoresheet [PDF, 38KB] from meeting.

November 2, 2010

Posted minutes [PDF, 137KB] and transcript [PDF, 689KB] from meeting.
Federal Register Notice
Medicare Evidence Development & Coverage Advisory Committee
September 22, 2010
7:30 AM – 4:30 PM
CMS Auditorium
Clifford Goodman, PhD, Chair
Saty Satya-Murti, MD, Vice Chair
Tamara Syrek Jensen, JD, Deputy Director, Coverage and Analysis Group
Maria Ellis, Executive Secretary

7:30 – 8:00 AM


8:00 – 8:15 AM

Opening Remarks—Maria Ellis/Tamara Syrek Jensen, JD/Clifford Goodman, PhD

8:15 - 8:25 AM

CMS Presentation of Voting Questions – Deirdre O’Connor

8:25 – 8:50 AM

Julie Glowacki, PhD, Professor of Orthopedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Professor of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Orthopedic Research, Brigham and Women’s Hospital

8:50 – 9:50 AM

TA Presentation:  Thomas Ratko, PhD, Associate Director, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, Technology Evaluation Center, EPC, Washington, DC

9:50 – 10:05 AM


10:05 – 10:50 AM

Scheduled Public Comments
(Refer to Speaker List)

Public attendees, who have contacted the executive secretary prior to the meeting, will address the panel and present information relevant to the agenda. Speakers are asked to state whether or not they have any financial involvement with manufacturers of any products being discussed or with their competitors and who funded their travel to this meeting.

10:50 – 11:05 AM

Open Public Comments

Public Attendees who wish to address the panel will be given that opportunity

11:05 – 12:00 PM

Questions to Presenters

12:00 – 1:00 PM

LUNCH (on your own)

1:00 – 2:00 PM

Initial Open Panel Discussion: Dr. Goodman

2:00 – 3:00 PM

Formal Remarks and Voting Questions

The Chairperson will ask each panel member to state his or her position on the voting questions

3:00 – 4:00 PM

Final Open Panel Discussion: Dr. Goodman

4:00 – 4:30 PM

Closing Remarks/Adjournment: Tamara Syrek Jensen & Dr. Goodman
Download meeting minutes [PDF, 137KB]
MEDCAC –September 22, 2010
On-Label and Off-Label use of Bone Morphogenetic Proteins (BMPs)

Voting Questions

For all voting questions, the clinically meaningful health outcomes of interest for CMS are pain, patient function and adverse events related to use of BMPs.

For explanation of premarket approval (PMA) and humanitarian device exemption (HDE) on-label use of BMPs, see the attached appendix that summarizes the FDA actions and public health notification on BMPs.

Off-label use is defined as any use for other than the manner or specific indications in the FDA approval.  Some examples of off-label use in the lumbar spine would be:

  • if infuse bone graft were used with a device other than the approved devices,
  • if infuse bone graft were used for more than one level in the lumbar spine,
  • if infuse/mastergraft or OP-1 were used in a primary lumbar fusion procedure as opposed to the approved revision fusion procedure.

For the voting questions, use the following scale identifying level of confidence - with 1 being the lowest or no confidence and 5 representing a high level of confidence.

1      —      2      —      3      —      4     —      5
Low                   Intermediate                      High
Confidence                   Confidence                       Confidence

  1. How confident are you that there is adequate evidence to determine whether or not the use of BMPs in each of the following indications improves at least one of the clinically meaningful health outcomes?
    1. On-label use in
      1. Lumbar spine ( FDA Ref. LS and LS HDE)
      2. Open tibial fracture ( FDA Ref. T)
      3. Recalcitrant long bone nonunions (FDA Ref. LB)

    2. Off-label use in
      1. Cervical spine
      2. Lumbar spine
      3. All other
      Note: Questions 2 -6 should be addressed only for those indications where the panel is confident that there is adequate evidence (mean vote of 2.5) to consider the question.

  2. How confident are you that there is adequate evidence to determine that the use of BMPs in the lumbar spine for each of the indications identified below improves at least one of the clinically meaningful health outcomes?
    1. FDA PMA on-label use (FDA Ref. LS)
    2. FDA HDE on-label use (FDA Ref. LS HDE)
    3. Off-label use

  3. How confident are you that the evidence is adequate to conclude that the use of BMPs for FDA HDE on-label use in recalcitrant long bone non-unions improves at least one of the clinically meaningful health outcomes? (FDA Ref. LB)

  4. How confident are you that the evidence is adequate to conclude that the use of BMPs for FDA PMA approved on-label use for the treatment of acute, open tibial fractures improves at least one of the clinically meaningful health outcomes? (FDA Ref. T )

  5. How confident are you that the evidence is adequate to conclude the off-label use of BMPs in the cervical spine improves at least one of the clinically meaningful health outcomes?
  6. How confident are you that these conclusions are generalizable to:
    1. the Medicare patient population?
    2. community based settings?
Discussion Questions
  1. In the absence of evidence based guidelines, what types of research are needed to address evidence gaps so that physicians can appropriately counsel patients on the risks and benefits of the use of BMPs?

Download Scoresheet [PDF, 38KB]

September 22, 2010

Clifford Goodman, PhD CHAIR
Senior Vice President
The Lewin Group

Saty Satya-Murti, MD, FAAN VICE CHAIR
Health Policy Consultant

Ray Baker, MD
Clinical Professor
Director of Interventional Pain Services
Department of Anesthesiology
University of Washington

Kevin J. Bozic, MD, MBA
Associate Professor in Residence
University of California, San Francisco
School of Medicine
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery
and Institute for Health Policy Studies

Helen Darling, MA
National Business Group on Health

Charles Davis, IIII, MD, PhD
Chief, Hip and Knee Joint Arthroplasty
Penn State Hershey Bone and Joint Institute
The Pennsylvania State University
College of Medicine

Jeffrey G. Jarvick, MD, MPH
Radiology & Neurosurgery
University of Washington

Susan Kendig, JD, MSN
Coordinator, Woman’s Health Nurse
Practitioner Program
Associate Teaching Professor
College of Nursing
University of Missouri-St. Louis

Raj Rao, MD
Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery and Neurosurgery
Medical College of Wisconsin

Invited Guest Speaker

Julie Glowacki, PhD
Professor of Orthopedic Surgery
Harvard Medical School
Professor of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery
Harvard School of Dental Medicine
Orthopedic Research
Brigham and Women’s Hospital

CMS Liaison

Tamara Syrek-Jensen, JD
Deputy Director
Coverage and Analysis Group

Executive Secretary

Maria Ellis
Coverage and Analysis Group

Courtland G. Lewis, MD
Orthopaedic Associates of Hartford, PC

Robert McDonough, MD, JD
Head, Clinical Policy Research &
Medical Policy & Program Administration
National Medical Services
Aetna, Inc.

J. Sanford Schwartz, MD
Professor of Medicine, Health Management & Economics
University of Pennsylvania

Andrew Sloan, MD, FACS
Staff Neurosurgeon, Department of Neurosurgery
University Hospitals of Cleveland

Robert L. Steinbrook, MD
Adjunct Associate Professor of
Medicine and Community and Family Medicine
Dartmouth Medical School

Industry Representative
Peter Juhn, MD, MPH
Therapeutic Resource Centers
Medco Health Solutions, Inc.

Guest Panel Members
John S. Kirkpatrick, M.D., F.A.C.S.
Professor and Chair
Department of Orthopaedics & Rehabilitation
University of Florida College of Medicine

Edward Kim, MD, MBA
Head, Multiple Sclerosis, Neuroscience and Psychiatry
Evidence Based Medicine
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation

Medicare Evidence Development & Coverage Advisory Committee
September 22, 2010



  • Brian K. Kwon, MD, PhD, FRCSC, Associate Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, University of British Columbia
  • R. Patrick Jacob, MD, FACS, Dunspaugh-Dalton Chair, Cranial and Spine Surgery, Department of Neurosurgery, University of Florida - Representing: American Association of Neurological Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons
  • Richard Kuntz, MD, Senior Vice President of Strategy and Scientific Operations, Medtronic, Inc.
  • William G. De Long, Jr., MD, Chief of Orthopaedic Surgery for St. Luke’s Hospital & Health Network, Bethlehem, PA -  Representing:   American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons
  • Christopher M. Bono, MD, Chair, Professional Economic and Regulatory Committee, NASS, Associate Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Chief, Orthopaedic Spine Service, Brigham and Women’s Hospital; William Mitchell, MD, Director, Health Policy Council, NASS, Board of Directors, NASS, Neurosurgeon, Coastal Spine - Representing:  North American Spine Society


Summary of FDA Actions on BMPs

Question Reference   Date Infuse (rhBMP -2) OP-1 (rhBMP -7) Indications
LS Lumbar Spine Anterior July 2, 2002 Approved PMA for Infuse Bone Graft/LT Cage (P000058) – Medtronic Sofamor Danek   Spinal fusion procedures in skeletally mature patients with degenerative disc disease at one level from L4-S1 via anterior open or anterior laparoscopic approach.  DDD confirmed by patient history, function deficit and/or neurological deficit and radiographic studies.  May have up to Grade I. Spondylolisthesis at involved level.  Should have had at least six months of nonoperative treatment prior to surgery with Infuse Bone Graft/LT Cage device.
December 1, 2003 Approval for the inclusion of additional fusion cage component designs for use with the InFuse Bone Graft Component.  The device as modified will include the previous device, along with InFuse Bone Graft/Inter Fix Threaded Fusion Device and Inter Fix RP Threaded Fusion Device.  (P000058/S004) – Medtronic Sofamor Danek   All indications are the same as the approval for the Infuse Bone Graft/LT Cage, except that these devices are only approved to be implanted via an anterior open approach.
July 29, 2004 Approval for 1) the extension of the levels of use, 2) modification of the indications, 3) change in storage temperature limit and 4) revisions to instruction for use. Infuse Bone Graft –LT Cage Lumbar tapered fusion device (P000058/S002) – Medtronic Sofamor Danek   Extended levels of use from L4-S1 to L2-S1.
Modified indications to allow the device to be used in subjects who may have retrolisthesis in conjunction with DDD.
Note;  There are additional supplemental approvals to P000058 not listed here that deal with things other than indications for use,  such as packaging, minor design modifications, storage temperature, etc.



Lumbar Spine Posterolateral April 7, 2004   Approved HDE (H020008) Stryker Biotech Indicated for use as an alternative to autograft in compromised patients requiring revision posterolateral (intertransverse) lumbar spinal fusion, for whom autologous bone and bone marrow harvest are not feasible or are not expected to promote fusion.  Examples of compromising factors include osteoporosis, smoking and diabetes.
October 10, 2008 Approved HDE for Infuse/mastergraft posterolateral revision device. (H040004) – Medtronic Sofamor Danek   This device is indicated for repair of symptomatic, posterolateral spine pseudarthrosis.  This device is intended to address a small subset of patients for whom autologous bone and/or bone marrow harvest are not feasible or are not expected to promote fusion.  These patients are diabetics and smokers.  This device is indicated to treat two or more levels of the lumbar spine where previous fusion has failed.
LB Long Bone October 17, 2001   Approved HDE (H010002) – Stryker Biotech As alternative to autograft in recalcitrant long bone nonunions where use of autograft is unfeasible and alternative treatments have failed.
T Tibia April 30, 2004 INFUSE PMA (P000054) – Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Approved for treating acute, open tibial shaft fractures that have been stabilized with IM nail fixation after appropriate wound management. INFUSE Bone Graft must be applied within 14 days after the initial fracture.  Prospective patients should be skeletally mature.  
  Sinus March 9, 2007 INFUSE Bone Graft PMA  (P050053) – Medtronic Sofamor Danek   Indicated as an alternative to autogenous bone graft for sinus augmentations, and for localized alveolar ridge augmentations for defects associated with extraction sockets.
    July 1, 2008     FDA issued a public health notification regarding BMP in cervical spine fusion.  The FDA warned of life-threatening complications associated with BMP when used in the cervical spine.  BMP is not approved for use in the cervical spine.
    March 31, 2009     *FDA- Orthopedic and Rehab Devices Panel advised not to approve Stryker OP-1 (P060021) for posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion in adult patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis.

*Stryker submitted an application with the FDA for OP-1 Putty spinal product and hoped for approval by late 2007.  FDA requested additional data which significantly delayed the company’s expectation for approval.  FDA convened an advisory committee to review this issue and did not recommend approval (2009).  No further action by FDA.