
Patient Communication Key to Safe Treatments
Key Takeaways
- Effective communication and education are vital when prescribing therapies with boxed warnings to ensure patient understanding and trust.
- Transparency about the origin and clinical relevance of boxed warnings transforms daunting labels into meaningful risk management discussions.
Lindsay Ackerman, MD, explains the importance of transparency when prescribing medications with boxed warnings.
Episodes in this series

In an interview with Dermatology Times at the
Ackerman explained that when she prescribes a medication with a boxed warning, commonly known as a “black box” warning, her first responsibility is to be transparent with patients or their caregivers. This transparency, she noted, includes explaining both the origin of the boxed warning and the clinical relevance of the safety concerns it describes. She believes that offering this context transforms what can be a daunting regulatory label into a meaningful conversation about risk management and evidence-based care. Boxed warnings are issued by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to highlight serious or life-threatening risks associated with specific drugs. However, Ackerman emphasized that these warnings can sometimes stem from findings in different patient populations or historical data that may not directly reflect the real-world dermatologic use of the medication today.
She underscored the importance of clinicians interpreting these warnings in light of current safety data, ongoing pharmacovigilance, and individual patient factors. Ackerman also noted that, to date, there have been no significant new safety signals associated with some of the agents carrying boxed warnings in dermatology, particularly regarding the major adverse events listed.
Nonetheless, she cautioned that this does not diminish the importance of ongoing vigilance. Rather, it reinforces the need for clinicians to contextualize risk appropriately while maintaining open dialogue with patients about potential benefits and adverse effects. Ultimately, Ackerman’s approach reflects a patient-centered philosophy grounded in shared decision-making. By demystifying boxed warnings and aligning the discussion with up-to-date safety data, clinicians can empower patients to make informed choices about their care—balancing efficacy, safety, and confidence in treatment decisions.
Click
Newsletter
Like what you’re reading? Subscribe to Dermatology Times for weekly updates on therapies, innovations, and real-world practice tips.


























