Given a paragraph, generate a claim that is supported by the given paragraph. 1) The claim must contain information from within the paragraph. 2) A sentence within the paragraph can be used as a claim. 3) The claim should not have contradictions within the paragraph. 4) The claim should be at most one sentence long.

[EX Q]: "There is no mention of cost. The story could have at least reported what the drug costs in its current use against blood cancer. The story did a good job of explaining both the potential benefits and harms of the drugs. This was a particular strength of this story – and made it stand out in comparison with the LA Times blog story that we also reviewed. Harms were emphasized from the outset – even in the headline – in the AP story but were never mentioned in the LA Times story. And this story reminded readers of the side effects encountered with another MS drug, Tysabri. Outstanding job on this issue by the AP. The story did a very good job of explaining the studies. There is no sign of disease-mongering in this story. Two apparently independent sources were quoted. The story did a good job comparing the new drugs with existing approaches to treat MS. Story explains that the drug is already sold to treat a rare blood cancer and stated that ""it’s too soon to know if the pills will be approved by the government or widely adopted by physicians."" It does not report, however, as the LA TImes blog did, that ""The drug company MD Serono, an affiliate of Merck, has requested approval from the Food and Drug Administration to market the tablet. However it recently received a ""refuse to file"" letter from the FDA, which means the agency is requiring additional information or data. MD Serono said it is pursuing the matter with the FDA and hopes to re-submit its application."" We think that’s a crucial piece of information that affects availability, although, of course, doctors can still prescribe it for off-label use even before the FDA acts on the new request. The novelty of ""tests of the first two oral drugs developed for treating MS"" was clear in the story. It is clear that this story did not rely on a news release."
[EX A]: MS pills show promise and risk, studies say

[EX Q]: Researchers studied the medical records of more than 1 million children and young adults aged 2 to 24 who were taking or had taken stimulants such as Ritalin or Adderall and found no sign of increased risk of heart problems. “We don’t see any evidence of increased risk,” said Dr. William Cooper of Vanderbilt University, whose study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine. The study in children is the first of three commissioned by the Food and Drug Administration to understand the potential heart risks of the drugs after U.S. and Canadian regulators received a number of reports in 2006 of heart attacks, strokes and sudden cardiac arrest in children taking the medications. The reports prompted several FDA advisory committee hearings on heart problems, and Health Canada temporarily suspended marketing of ADHD drugs. The concerns also prompted the American Heart Association to issue guidelines suggesting that children who were just starting to take the drugs should be tested for potential underlying heart problems. “There was a lot of concern and confusion among families and providers about what the best approach would be to treating kids who had ADHD and who might benefit from these medicines,” Cooper said by phone. ADHD is one of the most common child mental disorders, affecting around 3 to 5 percent of children globally. Children with ADHD are excessively restless, impulsive and easily distracted, and often have trouble at home and in school. There is no cure, but the symptoms can be kept in check by a combination of behavioral therapy and medication. In the United States, some 2.7 million children have prescriptions for ADHD drugs including Novartis’ Ritalin or methylphenidate and Focalin; Johnson & Johnson’s Concerta, Shire’s Adderall and Vyvanse and Eli Lilly’s Strattera. For the study, Cooper’s team used prescription data from four large, geographically and demographically diverse health plans on 1,200,438 children and youth, including both current and past users of the drugs. They checked health records for evidence of heart problems, including heart attacks, strokes and sudden cardiac deaths, in children who were currently taking the drugs or who had taken them. The team found no increased risk of heart problems for either current or past users of the drugs. Yet because there were so few cases of serious heart problems — just 81 — the study may not have been large enough to detect it. But even if there were a risk of heart problems, it is extremely slight, Cooper said. In a guidance document issued on Tuesday, the FDA said it continues to recommend that the drugs not be used in patients with serious heart problems. It added that patients should be monitored for changes in heart rate or blood pressure. Jefferies analyst Peter Welford said the findings will likely reassure investors in Shire, maker of Adderall and Vyvanse. But because there were so few heart problems, the study was underpowered and cannot conclusively dispel concerns about cardiovascular risks. Shire’s shares were flat on Tuesday, outperforming a sharply lower market.
[EX A]: ADHD drugs do not increase heart problems in kids.

[EX Q]: Dr. Marco Cavaleri, who heads the European regulator’s vaccines department, told a media briefing on Thursday that approving medicines to treat COVID-19 might be possible “before the summer,” citing ongoing clinical trials. Recent early results for the drug remdesivir suggested it could help patients recover from the coronavirus faster, although longer-term data is still needed to confirm any benefit. Although it typically takes years to develop a vaccine, Cavaleri said that if some of the shots already being tested prove to be effective, they could be licensed as early as the beginning of next year. Cavaleri cautioned, however, that many experimental vaccines never make it to the end and that there are often delays. “But we can see the possibility that if everything goes as planned, vaccines could be approved a year from now,” he said. More than 140 heads of states and health experts, including South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan and Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz issued an appeal Thursday calling on all countries to unite behind a “people’s vaccine” against COVID-19, to ensure any effective treatments and vaccines be available globally to anyone who needs them, for free. At the moment, there are about a dozen vaccine candidates being tested in China, Britain, Germany and the U.S. The World Health Organization has estimated it could take about 12 to 18 months for an effective vaccine to be found. While some experts have proposed dropping the requirement for large-scale advanced clinical trials altogether, Cavaleri said that wasn’t currently being considered. “Our current thinking is all vaccines under development should undergo large phase 3 trials to establish what is the level of protection,” he said. But he acknowledged that could change if the situation worsened. “Things may evolve as the pandemic will evolve and we will see if we need to do something else,” Cavaleri said. Some officials have warned that a vaccine might never be found; previous attempts to develop a vaccine against related coronaviruses like SARS and MERS have all failed. But Cavleri was optimistic an immunization against COVID-19 would eventually be discovered, as there are various technologies being tried globally. “I think it’s a bit early to say, but we have good reason to be sufficiently optimistic that at the end of the day, some vaccines will make it,” he said. ___ Follow AP pandemic coverage at http://apnews.com/VirusOutbreak and https://apnews.com/UnderstandingtheOutbreak
[EX A]:
EU: Possible virus drug approval ‘before the summer’.