The Medicolegal and Ethical Dimensions of Physician Prescription Reluctance.

This article addresses the potential legal ramifications for neurologists caring for patients with Alzheimer disease (AD) who elect neither to prescribe aducanumab nor to refer patients with AD for treatment with aducanumab. To prevail against a neurologist for failing to prescribe aducanumab or refer for aducanumab treatment, the plaintiff would have to establish that the neurologist's failure to prescribe the medication or refer for treatment was a breach of the standard of care. The standard of care is conceptualized as the generally accepted approach to diagnosing or treating a condition. However, the controversy surrounding the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) approval process for aducanumab (which was based on the drug's efficacy at reducing brain amyloidosis rather than on clinically meaningful efficacy) as well as the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) position statement on aducanumab and the recent decision by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to limit Medicare coverage of the drug and its associated costs to patients enrolled in qualifying clinical trials indicate that aducanumab cannot yet be considered the standard of care for the treatment of AD. Although deciding not to prescribe aducanumab does not violate the standard of care, neurologists treating patients with AD and not recommending this treatment should explain to their patients and their patients' surrogate decision makers why they are not recommending the treatment.