Archive for November, 2007

Hidden dangers of sex pills

Tuesday, November 13th, 2007

Stamina Rx MenHerbal sex-pill alternatives pose a hidden danger for men on common heart and blood-pressure drugs: popping one could lead to a stroke, or even death.

Many of the “all-natural” products with names such as Stamina-RX and Vigor-25 work because they contain unregulated versions of the drugs they are supposed to replace.

An Associated Press investigation found that spiked herbal impotency pills are emerging as a major public-health concern.

Herbal Sex Pills May Pose Hidden Dangers

Many of the pills marketed as safe herbal alternatives to Viagra and other prescription sex medications pose a hidden danger: For men on common heart and blood-pressure drugs, popping one could lead to a stroke, or even death.

“All-natural” products with names like Stamina-RX and Vigor-25 promise an apothecary’s delight of rare Asian ingredients, but many work because they contain unregulated versions of the very pharmaceuticals they are supposed to replace.

That dirty secret represents a special danger for the millions of men who take nitrates — drugs prescribed to lower blood pressure and regulate heart disease. When mixed, nitrates and impotency pharmaceuticals can slow blood flow catastrophically, leading to a heart attack or stroke.

An Associated Press investigation shows that spiked herbal impotency pills are emerging as a major public health concern that officials haven’t figured out how to track, much less tame.

Emergency rooms and poison control hot lines are starting to log more incidents of the long-ignored phenomenon. Sales of “natural sexual enhancers” are booming — rising to nearly $400 million last year. And dangerous knockoffs abound.

At greatest risk are the estimated 5.5 million American men who take nitrates — generally older and more likely to need help with erectile dysfunction.

The all-natural message can be appealing to such men, warned by their doctors and ubiquitous TV commercials not to take Viagra, Cialis or Levitra.

James Neal-Kababick, director of Oregon-based Flora Research Laboratories, said about 90 percent of the hundreds of samples he has analyzed contained forms of patented pharmaceuticals — some with doses more than twice that of prescription erectile dysfunction medicine. Other testers report similar results, particularly among pills that promise immediate results.

While no deaths have been reported, the AP found records of emergency room visits attributed to all-natural sex pills in Georgia, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Diego and elsewhere.

An elderly man in a retirement community north of Los Angeles took an in-the-mail sample and landed in the hospital for four days. A Michigan man sued the maker of Spontane-ES, blaming it for the stroke he suffered 20 minutes after taking a freebie that was advertised as “extremely safe.” Tim Fulmer, a lawyer representing Spontane-ES, said the pill did not contain any pharmaceutical and was not responsible for the stroke.

Mark B. Mycyk, a Chicago emergency room doctor who directs Northwestern University’s clinical toxicology research program, said he is seeing increasing numbers of patients who unwittingly took prescription-strength doses of the alternatives, a trend he attributes to ease of purchase on the Internet and the desperation of vulnerable men. He said he wouldn’t be surprised if there’d been undetected deaths from bad herbal pills.

Some herbal labels warn off users with heart or blood-pressure problems if they have taken their medicine within six hours; some doctors say 24 hours or more would be safer.

The AP often couldn’t determine from records whether incidents reported to tracking systems of the federal Food and Drug Administration and state poison control centers involved mixing herbal alternatives with nitrates.

Some men in their 30s who went to emergency rooms after taking herbal sex pills were presumably otherwise healthy, but they showed the transitory side effects of the active ingredients in regulated impotency pharmaceuticals, such as difficulty seeing clearly or severe headaches, records show.

While public health officials don’t know the extent of the problem, they agree that incidents are vastly underreported, with national tracking systems capturing perhaps as little as 1 percent of them. Victims may be embarrassed, and doctors rarely ask about supplements.

Since 2001, sales of supplements marketed as natural sexual enhancers have risen $100 million, to $398 million last year, including herbal mixtures, according to estimates by Nutrition Business Journal. Some legitimate herbal mixtures claim to work gradually over weeks; it’s the herbals marketed for immediate trysts that often are the problem.

Tight budgets, weak regulations and other priorities limit the FDA’s ability to police the products, often promoted via blasts of e-mail spam and fly-by-night Web sites.

“The Internet poses many enforcement challenges,” said Dr. Linda Silvers, who leads an FDA team that targets fraudulent health products sold online. “A Web site can look sophisticated and legitimate, but actually be an illegal operation.”

In many cases, the ingredients used to alter herbal pills come from Asia, particularly China, where the sexual enhancers are cooked up in labs at the beginning of a winding supply chain. The FDA has placed pills by two manufacturers in China and one from Malaysia on an import watch list.

Pills like Cialis generally retail at pharmacies for between $13 and $20, while herbals can cost less than $1, up to about $5.

Many health insurance plans provide limited coverage for prescription sex pills, especially for those with health-related difficulties. Few over-the-counter treatments are covered, and herbals aren’t likely to be among them, in part because they’re classified as foods not pharmaceuticals, said Mohit M. Ghose, spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, which represents major health insurers.

Spiked pills have turned up in Thailand, Taiwan, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Malaysia, the United Kingdom and the United States, according to testing done by Pfizer Inc., the New York-based pharmaceutical giant that developed Viagra. The company said that 69 percent of 3,400 supplements it purchased in China contained sildenafil citrate, the main ingredient in Viagra. Pfizer didn’t check for the patented ingredients of its rivals.

Under U.S. law, because such pills are “dietary supplements,” they’re far less regulated than pharmaceuticals and face few barriers to market. Viagra, by contrast, underwent years of testing before it was publicly available.

While herbal alternatives often contain exact copies of the patented drugs, some makers tweak the molecules to keep the effect of the original pharmaceutical while avoiding the scrutiny of the FDA and outside testing labs.

Federal officials have only recently stepped up investigations and prosecutions, and in any case, the FDA’s recall power is limited. Last week, in response to safety concerns about imported toothpaste, dog food and toys, President Bush recommended that the FDA be authorized to order mandatory recalls of dangerous products.

Currently, recalls are voluntary, and even if the agency determines that a product poses a “significant health risk,” a firm may refuse to cooperate. Plus, recalled products are widely offered on the Internet and pills are hard to round up.

Before a product called Nasutra was recalled a year ago by its manufacturer, the FDA had received a 30-year-old man’s report of a raging headache and an erection that wouldn’t go down. Following the recall, a 32-year-old man reported having spontaneous nose bleeds after taking the pill, records show.

E-mails requesting comment from Nasutra LLC, the company that voluntarily recalled the product in September 2006, were not returned. The FDA says the firm is located in Los Angeles; there is no listed phone number in the region.

During the past year, the FDA has orchestrated eight recalls of “herbal” pills that contained the ingredients found in Viagra, Cialis or Levitra, or their unregulated chemical cousins. Many of the firms were based around Los Angeles, their offices ranging from an unsigned door in a grungy hall on the fringe of downtown to a gated complex near Beverly Hills.

One recall involved a pill called Liviro3.

The current owner of the drug’s marketing and distributing firm said that after he tried the product, he quit his job at a car dealership and bought the brand name and stock of several thousand pills in 2004 for $450,000. In January, he said, FDA agents seized his stockpile after an agency lab found that Liviro3 contained tadalafil, the main ingredient in Cialis. The man told the AP he’d had no idea the pills were drug-laced.

One prosecution involved V. Vigor Corp., the Long Island-based maker of Vigor-25. While the product was advertised as containing Asian ginseng, lycium fruit and Chinese yam rhizome, FDA testing indicated that the pills contained Viagra.

Company executive Michael Peng had agreed to stop selling Vigor-25 following an FDA agent’s visit in late 2004, according to an arrest warrant affidavit. But between then and his arrest in September, at least 4.5 million pills were packaged for distribution, the affidavit said. According to prosecutors, Peng thought he could evade tests simply by switching from the sildenafil citrate he imported from China to Levitra’s active ingredient, vardenafil — a shipment of which U.S. Customs intercepted from Thailand.

Peng, who said through his attorney that he was “unaware that there was anything other than natural supplements” in Vigor-25, faces a charge of misbranding — in this instance, claiming that a pharmaceutical is a dietary supplement.

Two other pills, Spontane-ES and Stamina-RX, were made by companies run by Jared Wheat, who’s facing federal charges in Atlanta that he peddled knockoff pharmaceuticals cooked in a Central American lab. Prosecutors tried to keep Wheat from posting bail by asserting that he contemplated killing an FDA investigator and bribing a prosecutor.

Fulmer rejected those assertions, which did not lead to charges, saying Wheat is hardworking and nonviolent. Fulmer said Wheat’s two businesses are legitimate and continue to be successful.

Wheat was granted bond after pledging approximately $7.5 million in cash and property; he’s free under home confinement.

Prazosin protects brain

Saturday, November 10th, 2007

PrazosinA drug used for high blood pressure, enlargement of the prostate and as an antipsychotic may protect the brain from stress, U.S. researchers say.

Researchers at Oregon Health & Science University and Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center say Prozosin (brand name Minipress) appears to block the increase of steroid hormones known as glucocorticoids. Elevated levels of these hormones are linked to atrophy of nerve branches and nerve cell death.

“It’s known, from human studies, that corticosteroids are not good for you cognitively,” study co-author, Dr. S. Paul Berger, said in a statement. “We think prazosin protects the brain from being damaged by excessive levels of corticosteroid stress hormones.”

The researchers said high levels of glucocorticoids in blood serum are associated with such psychiatric conditions as schizophrenia, depression, post-traumatic stress syndrome and Alzheimer’s disease and are linked to decreases in cognitive performance in older people not suffering from clinical dementia.

The study was presented at the annual Society for Neuroscience conference in San Diego.

Prazosin drug helps posttraumatic stress disorder nightmares

A generic drug already used by millions of Americans for high blood pressure and prostate problems has been found to improve sleep and lessen trauma nightmares in veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

“This is the first drug that has been demonstrated effective for PTSD nightmares and sleep disruption,” said Murray A. Raskind, MD, executive director of the mental health service at the Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System and lead author of a study appearing April 15 in Biological Psychiatry.

The randomized trial of 40 veterans compared a nightly dose of prazosin (PRAISE-oh-sin) with placebo over eight weeks. Participants continued to take other prescribed medications over the course of the trial.

At the end of the study, veterans randomized to prazosin reported significantly improved sleep quality, reduced trauma nightmares, a better overall sense of well being, and an improved ability to function.

“These nighttime symptoms are heavily troublesome to veterans,” said Raskind, who also is director of VA’s VISN 20 (Veterans Integrated Service Network #20) Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Centers program (MIRECC). “If you get the nighttime symptoms under control, veterans feel better all around.”

Raskind, also a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the University of Washington, estimates that of the 10 million U.S. veterans and civilians with PTSD, about half have trauma-related nightmares that could be helped with the drug.

Participants were given 1 mg of prazosin per day for the first three days. The dose was gradually increased over the first four weeks to a maximum of 15 mg at bedtime. The average dose of prazosin in the trial was 13.3 mg. By comparison, typical prazosin doses for controlling blood pressure or treating prostate problems range from 3 mg to 30 mg per day in divided doses.

The drug did not affect blood pressure compared to placebo, though some participants reported transient dizziness when standing from a sitting position during the first weeks of prazosin titration. Other occasional side effects included nasal congestion, headache, and dry mouth, but these were all minor, according to the authors.

“This drug has been taken by many people for decades,” said Raskind. “If there were serious long-term adverse side effects, it is likely we would know about them by now.”

The relatively small size of the study was due to the easy availability of this generic drug, Raskind said. “If you are doing a study with a new drug, the only way people can get it is to be in the study. With prazosin, we have approximately 5,000 veterans with a PTSD diagnosis taking it already in the Northwest alone. So we had to find veterans with PTSD who were not [taking it].”

For treating PTSD, prazosin costs 10 to 30 cents a day at VA contract prices. It is not a sedating sleeping pill, emphasized Raskind. “It does not induce sleep. But once you are asleep, you sleep longer and better.”

And better sleep can make a big difference. “This drug changes lives,” Raskind said. “Nothing else works like prazosin.”

Trauma nightmares appear to arise during light sleep or disruption in REM sleep, whereas normal dreams ,both pleasant and unpleasant, occur during normal REM sleep. Prazosin works by blocking the brain’s response to the adrenaline-like neurotransmitter norepinephrine. Blocking norepinephrine normalizes and increases REM sleep. In this study, veterans taking prazosin reported that they resumed normal dreaming.

One dose of prazosin works for 6 to 8 hours. Unlike similar drugs, prazosin does not induce tolerance; people can take it for years without increasing the dose. But when veterans stop taking it, Raskind said, the trauma nightmares usually return.

Aside from the VA-funded study he just published, Raskind is working on three larger studies of prazosin. One, a VA cooperative study slated to start this month, will enroll about 300 veterans at 12 VA facilities. The second, a collaborative study with Walter Reed Army Medical Center and Madigan Army Medical Center, will enroll active-duty soldiers who have trauma nightmares. The third study, funded by the National Institute of Mental Health, will look at prazosin in the treatment of civilian trauma PTSD.

Why is this medication prescribed?

Prazosin is used alone or in combination with other medications to treat high blood pressure. Prazosin is in a class of medications called alpha-blockers. It works by relaxing the blood vessels so that blood can flow more easily through the body.

How should this medicine be used?

Prazosin comes as a capsule to take by mouth. It usually is taken two or three times a day at evenly spaced intervals. The first time taking prazosin, you should take it before you go to bed. Follow the directions on your prescription label carefully, and ask your doctor or pharmacist to explain any part you do not understand. Take prazosin exactly as directed. Do not take more or less of it or take it more often than prescribed by your doctor.

Your doctor will probably start you on a low dose of prazosin and gradually increase your dose.

Prazosin controls high blood pressure but does not cure it. Continue to take prazosin even if you feel well. Do not stop taking prazosin without talking to your doctor.

Other uses for this medicine

Prazosin is also used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH, noncancerous enlargement of the prostate), congestive heart failure, pheochromocytoma (adrenal gland tumor), and Raynaud’s disease (condition where the fingers and toes change skin color from white to blue to red when exposed to hot or cold temperatures). Talk to your doctor about the possible risks of using this medication for your condition.

This medication may be prescribed for other uses; ask your doctor or pharmacist for more information.

What side effects can this medication cause? Return to top

Prazosin may cause side effects. Tell your doctor if any of these symptoms or those listed in the SPECIAL PRECAUTIONS section are severe or do not go away:

  • weakness
  • tiredness
  • headache
  • nausea

Some side effects can be serious. If you experience any of the following symptoms, call your doctor immediately:

  • hives
  • rash
  • itching
  • difficulty breathing
  • fast, pounding, or irregular heartbeat
  • chest pain
  • painful erection of the penis that lasts for hours

Brand name - Minipress®

AIDS vaccines don’t justify hopes

Saturday, November 10th, 2007

AIDS vaccineAIDS vaccine researchers are worried about the future of their field after learning an experimental HIV vaccine not only does not work, but just might make recipients more susceptible to infection with the AIDS virus!

They are worried about their volunteers and the future of AIDS vaccines in general. And they are worried because they cannot understand how a vaccine would make a person more vulnerable.

Researchers from Merck & Co., which makes the vaccine, and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which is helping develop it, said on Wednesday they believe a type of common cold virus used as the basis of the vaccine may somehow have made their volunteers more susceptible to HIV.

They are meeting this week in Seattle to hash through the data and figure out what happened.

This is what they know: Out of 1,500 people vaccinated, 82 became infected with the AIDS virus. Of these, 49 got the vaccine and 33 got a placebo shot.

While they are counseling volunteers that they may have raised their own risk of becoming infected, they are also trying to figure out what happened.

“The data are disappointing and puzzling but we don’t have definitive answers,” Dr. Lawrence Corey of Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, who was organizing the trial, told reporters.

Only one woman in the trial became infected with HIV. The rest were men having sex with other men, and it was the men who started out with the highest immune response to the adenovirus 5 common cold bug used to make the vaccine who were the most likely to become infected with the AIDS virus.

But the infected men were also less likely to have been circumcised — circumcision can also prevent HIV infection — and may have engaged in more risky behavior. So did the vaccine actually do something, or were the results a fluke?

“I don’t think we really do know,” Dr. Keith Gottesdiener of Merck Research Laboratories told Reuters.

FUTURE OF THE FIELD

Nearly 30 potential AIDS vaccines are being tested in people around the world.

“It is very important for the future of the field,” said Margaret Johnston, director of the AIDS vaccine research program at the NIAID.

“It makes us rethink some of the candidates that are in trial,” said Dr. Seth Berkley, president of the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative.

Even vaccine advocates are calling it a setback.

“These data are deeply disappointing and troubling, and raise more questions than answers for the field of AIDS vaccine,” said AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition executive director Mitchell Warren.

“This setback should not and can not diminish our commitment to developing an effective HIV vaccine,” said NIAID director Dr. Anthony Fauci. “Every day, another 12,000 people become infected with HIV, most of whom live in resource-poor countries,” he added.

The researchers agree the finding could at the very least scare people off from taking part in AIDS vaccine trials. And because HIV only infects people, having human volunteers is key to finding a way to prevent an infection that has killed 25 million people and affects 40 million more.

“That is why we are being completely transparent, as open as possible,” Fauci said in a recent interview.

Berkley agreed. “I am only worried if there is a lot of buzz, misinformation around,” he said.

But the fact that vaccine volunteers even became infected drives home the need for a vaccine, said Berkley. All the volunteers were counseled about ways to avoid HIV infection, and given condoms. “If those behavioral change interventions worked, we wouldn’t need a vaccine,” Berkley said.

“People will get infected despite the best counseling possible.”

Experimental aids vaccine increased risk

New data on an experimental AIDS vaccine that failed to work shows volunteers who got the shots were far more likely to get infected with the virus through sex or other risky behavior than those who got dummy shots.

The new details, released Wednesday by drugmaker Merck & Co., don’t answer the crucial question of whether failure of the vaccine also spells doom for many similar AIDS vaccines now in testing.

And researchers weren’t sure why more of the vaccinated volunteers wound up getting HIV than those who got dummy shots.

Some 3,000 people, mostly gay men and female sex workers, had volunteered to get the vaccine or dummy shots. All were warned to protect themselves from AIDS exposure.

At the time the study was halted in September, Merck said 24 of 741 volunteers who got the vaccine in one segment of testing later developed HIV; 21 of 762 participants who got dummy shots also were infected.

New data released Wednesday showed that to date, 49 of 914 vaccinated men had become infected with HIV, compared with 33 of the 922 men who got dummy shots.

AIDS vaccine may raise infection risk

More than 3,000 people who volunteered to receive an experimental Merck and Co. AIDS vaccine are being told to come back and get extra tests because the jab may itself raise the risk of infection.

Researchers stress that they do not yet have enough information to say whether those who got the shot indeed are more susceptible to infection with HIV. But they said initial information from the trial, which was stopped suddenly last month, is worrisome.

(more…)

Amrubicin shows great in treatment of small cell lung cancer

Saturday, November 10th, 2007

AmrubicinPharmion Corporation (Nasdaq: PHRM) released interim findings from its Phase 2 trial of Amrubicin in second-line chemo-sensitive small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Amrubicin, the company’s third-generation synthetic anthracycline, is a potent topoisomerase II inhibitor currently in development for the treatment of SCLC. These findings indicate favorable interim results in terms of response rate and survival for Amrubicin in second-line treatment of small-cell lung cancer patients with extensive disease (ED) SCLC. The early results of this study were presented at the 2007 Chemotherapy Foundation Symposium in New York City.

“Treatment options for second-line SCLC are limited and preliminary data from the US-based Phase 2 sensitive SCLC trial indicate that Amrubicin may provide a new option for SCLC patients who desperately need more treatment choices,” said principal investigator Robert M. Jotte, MD, PhD, Medical Director of the Lung Cancer Clinic of the Rockies, Developmental Co-Chair USON Lung Committee. “As we near completion of the Phase 2 trial, we hope that accrual to the Phase 3 trial will be rapid and confirm the results of the US Phase 2 trial and similar trials in Japan.”

The trial presented today compares Amrubicin and topotecan in patients with ED-SCLC that initially responded to first-line platinum-based therapy but whose disease recurred or progressed at least 90 days after completion of first-line treatment (sensitive SCLC). Study participants are randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive either IV Amrubicin (40mg/m2 daily for 3 days) or topotecan (1.5 mg/m2 daily for 5 days), both starting on Day 1 of a 21-day cycle.

Response data from 42 patients have been analyzed, 28 treated with Amrubicin and 14 with topotecan. Eleven of 28 (39 percent) patients who received one or more cycles of Amrubicin have demonstrated a response, including two complete responses (CR) and nine partial responses (PR). Eight of the responses are confirmed and three are pending follow-up scans. Two of 14 (14 percent) patients who received one or more cycles of topotecan had a response (both PRs). One is confirmed and one is pending a follow-up scan.

Survival times are not yet mature, however, at this time preliminary data already show an observed difference of 2.4 months in overall survival, which translates to a hazard ratio of 0.67, favoring Amrubicin.

The most common adverse events were hematological and were generally equal between the two arms. No classical anthracycline cardiotoxicity has been observed to date, supporting data from earlier Japanese studies that suggest Amrubicin may be devoid of this anthracycline-associated adverse event.

A second Amrubicin Phase 2 trial is also underway evaluating single-agent Amrubicin in patients with ED SCLC that are chemo-refractory or progressive within 90 days of completion of first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (refractory SCLC). Study participants receive Amrubicin (40 mg/m2 via 5-minute infusion daily for 3 days) on Day 1 of a 21-day cycle.

Enrollment in both second-line Phase 2 studies of Amrubicin is expected to complete by the end of 2007.

Pharmion has an additional ongoing Phase 2 study of Amrubicin in first line SCLC patients in association with the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). This study evaluates Amrubicin as single-agent or combination therapy with cisplatin versus cisplatin plus etoposide in previously untreated ED-SCLC patients. Preliminary data from this study are expected in the second half of 2008.

Pharmion recently initiated an international pivotal Phase 3 trial of Amrubicin versus topotecan as second-line treatment of small cell lung cancer (sensitive or refractory and limited or extensive disease). The randomized, controlled, multi-center study will compare Amrubicin to topotecan, the only approved chemotherapy for second-line treatment of SCLC in the US and EU. The primary endpoint of the study is overall survival. Enrollment in the study of 480 patients is underway. Pharmion has completed the Scientific Advice (SA) process with the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) and has reached Special Protocol Assessment (SPA) agreement with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the Amrubicin Phase 3 SCLC study.

New Synthetic Anthracycline, Amrubicin, Shows Promise for the Treatment of Small Cell Lung Cancer

Researchers from Japan have determined that a new synthetic anthracycline in combination with cisplatin (Platinol®) has significant activity in newly diagnosed extensive small cell lung cancer (SCLC). The details of this phase I/II study appeared in the March 2005 issue of the Annals of Oncology .

Small cell lung cancer is very sensitive to a variety of chemotherapy agents, including anthracyclines such as doxorubicin (Adriamycin®). However, anthracyclines are associated with early and late cardiac damage, limiting their use. Amrubicin is a totally synthetic anthracycline developed by the Japanese and is currently in phase I testing. In animal testing, this synthetic agent has few, if any, heart toxicities.

In this phase I/II study, the goal was to determine the maximum tolerated doses of the drug combination amrubicin and cisplatin and to ensure the safety of the recommended doses. Study participants were diagnosed with extensive SCLC and had not been previously treated with any type of chemotherapy. All patients received their amrubicin doses on days 1-3 and cisplatin on day 1 only, every 3 weeks. Results of the study defined safe and potentially effective doses. The overall response rate was 87.8% among both groups. The average survival time was 13.6 months and the 1-year survival rate was 56.1%. The most common side effects that were observed included a drop in the white blood count. Researchers concluded that the combination of amrubicin and cisplatin demonstrated a promising response rate and survival period for patients who were previously untreated for extensive SCLC.

Comments: This is an important study, as it shows significant activity for a totally synthetic drug that was engineered to eliminate cardiac. Unfortunately, this drug will not be on the market for quite some time. However, when there is concern about cardiac toxicity, there are currently FDA-approved drugs such as Doxil®, that are less cardio-toxic than doxorubicin.

About Amrubicin

Pharmion acquired the rights to Amrubicin in November 2006 through its acquisition of Cabrellis Pharmaceuticals. In 2002, Amrubicin was approved and launched for sale in Japan based on Phase 2 efficacy data in both SCLC and NSCLC. Since January 2005, Amrubicin has been marketed by Nippon Kayaku, a Japanese pharmaceutical firm focused on oncology, which licensed Japanese marketing rights from Dainippon Sumitomo, the original developer of Amrubicin.

(more…)

Vioxx - a $4.85 billion cost painkiller

Friday, November 9th, 2007

VioxxMerck & Co. said it will pay $4.85 billion to end thousands of lawsuits over its painkiller Vioxx in what is believed to be the largest drug settlement ever.

Merck faced personal injury lawsuits representing 47,000 plaintiffs, and about 265 potential class action cases, filed by people or family members who claimed the drug proved fatal or injured its users. The agreement covers cases filed in both federal and state courts.

Negotiating teams met more than 50 times in eight states and spoke hundreds of times over the telephone to hammer out the deal, according to attorneys.

“I’m very happy with it,” Chris Seeger, one of the six plaintiff lawyers who helped negotiate the settlement, said Friday. “It’s a tremendous way to resolve this litigation.”

Merck pulled Vioxx from the market Sept. 30, 2004 after its researchers determined the then-blockbuster painkiller doubled risk of heart attacks and strokes.

To qualify for a settlement, plaintiffs must have filed claims by Thursday and meet several criteria, including medical proof that they suffered a heart attack or stroke, that they received at least 30 Vioxx pills and that they received enough pills to support a presumption that they were ingested within two weeks before injury.

That is a big concession by Merck, which has long claimed that Vioxx caused harm only after 18 months of use.

Those claims were dismissed by independent scientists and plaintiffs lawyers.

Merck stressed that the agreement is not a class action settlement and that it is not admitting fault.

Company executives and attorneys said as recently as last month that every case would be fought individually.

Analyst Steve Brozak of WBB Securities called Merck’s’ handling of the litigation “a Harvard casebook study of how to deal with a problematic product.”

Investors seemed to agree, as Merck shares jumped 4.6 percent, or $12.50, to $57.27 Friday.

Analysts predicted early on that liability could reach $50 billion, but after losing its first case in a $253 million verdict, Merck has won a string of civil cases.

Merck may now have put the uncertainty of millions of dollars in legal costs behind it, though it has been fairly successful fighting cases individually, winning 10 of 15 court verdicts to date.

The company said last month it had added $70 million to its reserves for defending lawsuits. As of Sept. 30, Merck had reserved a total of $1.92 billion for legal expenses and spent a total of $1.2 billion.

The deal becomes binding only if 85 percent of the plaintiffs in about 26,600 lawsuits agree to drop their cases. It was finalized in the early morning hours after attorneys for Merck and the plaintiffs met with three of the four judges overseeing nearly all Vioxx claims.

Seeger said the deal was put in motion last December when three key judges pushed the parties to open out-of-court talks.

“Every claimant is going to be compensated” once their claim is validated, he said.

Seeger believes it is the largest settlement ever in the industry and said he will recommend that his 2,000 clients accept the deal.

Payments would vary, depending on severity of injuries and the length of time that Vioxx was used.

“The agreement is structured to provide a significant degree of certainty toward resolving the majority of the outstanding VIOXX product liability claims in the United States for a fixed amount,” Richard T. Clark, chairman, president and chief executive officer of Merck, said in a statement.

Attorneys for both sides were to present the deal Friday morning to U.S. District Judge Eldon E. Fallon in New Orleans.

“In light of significant costs and delay that would result in protracted litigation, the settlement program will ensure that those who suffered injuries as a result of Vioxx are compensated fairly and efficiently,” according to a statement from one of the lead plaintiffs law firms in the case, Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles of Montgomery, Ala.

Merck agrees to pay $4.85 bln in Vioxx settlement

Merck & Co has agreed to pay $4.85 billion to settle claims that its painkiller Vioxx caused heart attacks and strokes in thousands of users, the drugmaker said on Friday.

The agreement covers lawsuits filed against the company in U.S. courts, resolving a major legal battle that has dogged the drugmaker since it pulled Vioxx off the market three years ago.

Merck recalled the popular painkiller, which had $2.5 billion in annual sales, in September 2004 after a study showed it doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke in patients taking it for more than 18 months.

In the settlement, reached with representatives of plaintiffs in federal and state courts, Merck did not admit Vioxx caused patient injury and did not admit fault.

The drugmaker, whose shares rose nearly 2 percent in pre-market trade on news of the deal, said it would take a charge of $4.85 billion to cover costs of the agreement.

The settlement marks a shift in strategy for Merck, which previously said it intended to fight Vioxx litigation on a case-by-base basis rather than consider a broad settlement.

“The agreement is structured to provide a significant degree of certainty toward resolving the majority of the outstanding Vioxx product-liability claims in the United States for a fixed amount,” said Richard Clark, chairman, president and chief executive officer of Merck.

The drugmaker said it would still defend all claims not included in the settlement. Since the withdrawal of Vioxx, Merck has won 11 court cases over the drug and lost five.

While it is appealing those cases that it lost, analysts said the settlement will solidify Merck’s future.

“They’re trying to reduce the uncertainty surrounding the costs related to Vioxx,” said Damien Conover, an analyst at Morningstar. “While it will probably bring a little more clarity, I think there are still going to be a lot of cases that won’t settle within this agreement.”

Conover said the cases included in the settlement are likely the weakest cases.

“What you’re going to be left with is a significant number of plaintiffs who will want to address Merck on an individual basis, which means they will likely seek higher compensation,” he said.

Conover said that while it is difficult to gauge how many people will try to fight Merck alone, he estimates the company could be facing 1,000 to 2,000 outstanding claims and could face more than $1 billion in additional costs.

Mike Ward of Nomura Securities in London said a settlement value of less than $5 billion likely would be taken positively by the market, noting that litigation over Wyeth’s Phen-Fen diet drug was only now coming slowly to a close after 10 years in the courts and over $21 billion in settlement costs.

Merck shares tumbled on news of the withdrawal of Vioxx in 2004, losing more than a third of their market value. But with Merck’s Vioxx victories in court, and a string of successful new medicines, the shares have recouped those losses.

The stock, even with the major litigation drag, has outperformed its peers on the American Stock Exchange pharmaceutical index this year, rising 25 percent, compared with little change in the index.

Merck shares rose to $55.70 in pre-market trade from a Thursday close at $54.77 on the New York Stock Exchange. The stock is trading just below a four-year high of $58.36, reached earlier this month.

!Vioxx was withdrawn from the U.S. market in 2004!

The manufacturer of Vioxx has announced a voluntary withdrawal of the drug from the U.S. and worldwide market. This withdrawal is due to safety concerns of an increased risk of cardiovascular events (including heart attack and stroke) in patients taking Vioxx.

Notify your doctor immediately if you develop abdominal pain, tenderness, or discomfort; nausea; blood in your vomit; bloody, black, or tarry stools; unexplained weight gain; swelling or water retention; fatigue or lethargy; a skin rash; itching; yellowing of your skin or eyes;”flu-like” symptoms; or unusual bruising or bleeding. These symptoms could be early signs of dangerous side effects.

What is Vioxx?

!Vioxx was withdrawn from the U.S. market in 2004!

Vioxx is in a class of drugs called nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Vioxx works by reducing substances that cause inflammation, pain, and fever in the body.

Vioxx is used to reduce pain, inflammation, and stiffness caused by osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis and certain forms of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis; to manage acute pain in adults; to treat migraines; and to treat menstrual pain.

Cordaptive to replace Zokor?

Wednesday, November 7th, 2007

CordaptiveMerck announced that the extended-release niacin/laropiprant (cordaptive) co administered with simvastatin had significant additive effects on reducing LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C), increasing HDL-cholesterol (HDL-C) and reducing triglyceride levels in a phase III study with patients with primary hypercholesterolemia or mixed dyslipidemia. The results were presented by Merck & Co, Inc. at the American Heart Association 2007 Scientific Sessions in Orlando, Fla.

In the study, 2 g (two 1-gram tablets) of Cordaptive co administered with simvastatin (pooled across 20 mg or 40 mg doses) reduced LDL-C by 48 per cent, increased HDL-C by 28 per cent, and reduced triglyceride levels by 33 per cent following 12 weeks of treatment. The primary study endpoint was LDL-C reduction; secondary endpoints included increased HDL-C, triglyceride reduction and effects on other lipoproteins. A 1 g tablet of cordaptive contains 1 g of Merck-developed extended-release niacin and 20 mg of laropiprant - a novel flushing pathway inhibitor that is designed to reduce the flushing associated with niacin. All of the comparative lipid efficacy results were measured as mean per cent change from baseline and were statistically significant, p < 0.001.

“The results in this study suggest that, if approved, cordaptive used with a statin could offer another approach to treat patients with dyslipidemia,” said Christie M. Ballantyne, associate chief and professor of medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, and co-author of the study.

The double-blind, parallel, 12-week study with seven treatment arms in almost 1400 patients evaluated 1 g of cordaptive (1 g extended-release niacin/20 mg laropiprant) coadministered with simvastatin 10 mg to 40 mg in weeks one through four and 2 g of cordaptive (two 1-gram tablets each containing 1 g extended-release niacin/20 mg of laropiprant) co administered with simvastatin 20 mg to 40 mg in weeks five through 12 (n = 590). Tolerability and the safety profile of Cordaptive co administered with simvastatin were also evaluated.

Reported lipid results in other treatment arms included a 17 per cent decrease in LDL-C, 23 per cent increase in HDL-C, and 22 per cent decrease in triglycerides with Cordaptive alone (n = 192); and a 37 per cent reduction in LDL-C, six per cent increase in HDL-C and 15 per cent reduction in triglycerides with simvastatin alone (pooled) (n = 585).

Reported side effects of interest included: liver enzyme elevations >3x ULN in ALT and/or AST (0.3 per cent with cordaptive co administered with simvastatin, 0.5 per cent with Cordaptive alone, and 1.0 per cent with simvastatin alone), and increased median fasting plasma glucose values (4.0 mg/dL with Cordaptive plus simvastatin, 4.0 mg/dL with Cordaptive alone, and 1.0 mg/dL with simvastatin alone). There were no cases of creatine kinase (CK) levels >10x ULN in the group treated with Cordaptive coadministered with simvastatin, which was not significantly different than that of the group treated with Cordaptive or simvastatin alone (0.5 per cent and 0.3 per cent, respectively). All elevations were asymptomatic and resolved with discontinuation of treatment. There were no cases of myopathy, rhabdomyolysis or drug-related hepatitis.

Discontinuations due to flushing were 4.8 per cent in the group treated with cordaptive co administered with simvastatin, 8.7 per cent with Cordaptive alone and 0.3 per cent with simvastatin alone.

Niacin-induced flushing is primarily caused by a prostaglandin, PGD2, a chemical that causes vasodilatation in the skin and flushing symptoms, acting through the DP1 flushing pathway. Laropiprant selectively blocks the binding of PGD2 to its receptor, DP1. Research has shown blocking DP1 reduces flushing associated with niacin.

“It has been shown that niacin-based therapies reduce the risk of cardiovascular events. But even though niacin has broad lipid effects, the flushing side effect has been a barrier to many patients reaching the maximum 2 g dose,” said John Paolini, MD, Clinical Research, Cardiovascular Disease, Merck Research Laboratories.

Cordaptive is in development by Merck for the treatment of elevated LDL-C, low HDL-C and elevated triglycerides. Merck has previously announced that the NDA for cordaptive has been accepted by the US FDA and the regulatory action is anticipated in the second quarter of 2008. Merck is also on track to file an NDA in 2008 for the company’s investigational compound MK 0524B.

Dyslipidemia is the elevation of LDL-C and/or triglycerides or a low HDL-C level that contributes to the development of atherosclerosis, the number one cause of death among men and women and the primary reason for loss of quality of life in Western countries. Major modifiable risk factors for atherosclerotic disease include hypertension, diabetes, obesity, smoking and high levels of total cholesterol or LDL-C. Low levels of HDL-C also increase a person’s chances of developing atherosclerosis. In fact, epidemiologic studies have shown that for every 1 mg/dL rise in HDL-C, the risk of developing cardiovascular disease decreases by two per cent to three per cent.

Simvastatin, a cholesterol-modifying medicine from Merck, and marketed under the brand name Zocor, is used in addition to diet to modify cholesterol levels after diet and other non-drug measures have failed to achieve target levels.

Researchers have said that patients were able to safely use Merck & Co.’s experimental Cordaptive drug to raise good HDL cholesterol alongside the company’s older Zocor cholesterol medicine.

Results of the Phase III trial involved about 1,400 patients and lasted 12 weeks. Cordaptive is a combination of an extended release form of niacin, a nutrient that raises heart-protective HDL, and an experimental drug called laropiprant that reduces the uncomfortable facial flushing which is a side effect of niacin.

Merck aims to seek approval next year for a separate product called MK-524B. It would combine Cordaptive in the same tablet with simvastatin, the active ingredient of Zocor which works by cutting the body’s production of LDL.

In the trial, levels of LDL fell 48 percent among patients receiving simvastatin as well as Cordaptive containing the full recommended two gram dose of niacin. That effectiveness against LDL, the primary goal of the trial, was deemed highly statistically significant.

Patients taking Cordaptive by itself in the trial experienced favorable, but less-impressive results: a 17 percent decrease in LDL, a 23 percent boost in HDL and a 22 percent drop in triglycerides.

Cordaptive is now awaiting U.S. marketing approval.

Gardasil prevents cervical cancer; new findings

Tuesday, November 6th, 2007

GardasilMerck, the manufacturer of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine Gardasil, already being administered in many countries to girls as young as 12 to help prevent cervical cancer, has announced findings of a trial that shows it is also effective for women as old as 45.

The drugmaker announced details of an investigational study where Gardasil reduced the rate of infection due to four strains of sexually transmitted human papillomavirus (HPV) in women up to the age of 45, at the 24th International Papillomavirus Conference (IPC) in Beijing, China, yesterday, Sunday November 4th.

Gardasil is a quadrivalent, recombinant vaccine designed to reduce infection due to HPV strains 6, 11, 16 and 18 and trials have already shown it be to effective for girls and women aged 9 to 26 years in the prevention of cervical cancer, precancerous or dysplastic lesions, and genital warts. In trials it was shown that by protecting against the four HPV strains that cause most of the diseases, it prevented 70 per cent of cervical cancer cases and 90 per cent of genital warts cases.

In the latest international, multi-center, trial involving more than 3,800 women, the three dose vaccine was also shown to prevent 91 per cent of persistent infection, low-grade cervical abnormalities and pre-cancers, as well as external genital lesions caused by the four strains of HPV in women aged 24 to 45.

The women in the trial had no history of genital warts; hysterectomy; LEEP (loop electrosurgical excision procedure) or biopsy-diagnosed cervical HPV disease in the five years previous to enrollment. They were also all free of infection from at least one of the four HPV strains when they were enrolled in the study and remained free of infection from the same strains when they finished the three doses of vaccine or placebo.

Dr Eliav Barr, executive director of Biologics Clinical Research and head of the HPV Vaccine Program, Merck Research Laboratories said in a press statement that:

“Women remain at significant risk for acquiring HPV infections and developing HPV-related diseases throughout their lifetime.”

“These data build on the clinical program for GARDASIL and will help us to understand the potential benefit that GARDASIL may have in women through age 45,” added Barr.

The drugmaker will be submitting the results of the trial with an application to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) before the end of the year to extend approved indication of the vaccine for women up to 45. The FDA approved Gardasil in June 2006 and the vaccine is recommended for use in the US for girls and women aged 11 to 26 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Researchers tracked the incidence of persistent infection, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and external genital lesions caused by the four HPV strains (6, 11, 16 and 18) and diseases caused by HPV 16 and 18.

The results showed that:

  • There were 4 cases of of persistent infection, CIN or external genital lesions (genital warts and vaginal and vulvar lesions) caused by HPV 6, 11, 16 or 18 in the vaccine group compared to 41 cases in the placebo group.
  • This equated to a 91 percent reduction in incidence (at 95 per cent confidence interval, or CI) over an average follow up of 1.65 years.
  • There were 4 cases of of persistent infection, low-grade cervical abnormalities and pre-cancers, and external genital lesions caused by HPV types 16 and 18 alone, in the vaccine group, and 23 cases in the placebo group.
  • This equated to a 83 per cent prevention rate (at 95 per cent CI) for diseases caused by HPV types 16 and 18 alone.
  • The vaccine prevented 100 per cent of persistent infections, external genital lesions, and low-grade cervical abnormalities and pre-cancers, caused by HPV strains 6 and 11.
  • It also reduced abnormal Pap test results related to HPV 16 and 18 by 94 percent (at 95 per cent CI).
  • The most common adverse events related to the injection site (redness, pain, pruritis, swelling, warmth) and were higher in the vaccine than the placebo group (76.4 versus 64.2 per cent).

Gardasil is widely available in the US, and all the country’s 55 immunization programs have adopted it. In addition to the US, the vaccine is approved in 85 countries throughout the world, including all of the European Union, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, New Zealand and Taiwan.

HPV is a common infection, and it is estimated that some 20 million people in the US have it and that 80 per cent of women will have acquired it by the age of 50. In most people HPV is self-limiting and disappears by itself. But for some women, the higher risk HPV strains can lead to cervical cancer if untreated.

Nearly half a million cases of cervical cancer are diagnosed worldwide every year, and 240,000 women die from it each year. It is the second most common cause of cancer death in women worldwide.

In June 2006, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted to recommend the first vaccine developed to prevent cervical cancer and other diseases in females caused by certain types of genital human papillomavirus (HPV). The vaccine, Gardasil®, protects against four HPV types, which together cause 70% of cervical cancers and 90% of genital warts.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) licensed this vaccine for use in girls/women, ages 9-26 years. The vaccine is given through a series of three shots over a six-month period.

Some general information about genital HPV & Cervical Cancer

Genital HPV is a common virus that is passed on through genital contact, most often during vaginal and anal sex. About 40 types of HPV can infect the genital areas of men and women. While most HPV types cause no symptoms and go away on their own, some types can cause cervical cancer in women. These types also have been linked to other less common genital cancers— including cancers of the anus, vagina, and vulva (area around the opening of the vagina). Other types of HPV can cause warts in the genital areas of men and women, called genital warts.

How is HPV related to cervical cancer?
Some types of HPV can infect a woman’s cervix (lower part of the womb) and cause the cells to change. Most of the time, HPV goes away on its own. When HPV is gone, the cervix cells go back to normal. But sometimes, HPV does not go away. Instead, it lingers (persists) and continues to change the cells on a woman’s cervix. These cell changes (or “precancers”) can lead to cancer over time, if they are not treated.

How common is HPV?
At least 50% of sexually active people will get HPV at some time in their lives. Every year in the United States (U.S.), about 6.2 million people get HPV. HPV is most common in young women and men who are in their late teens and early 20s.

Anyone who has ever had genital contact with another person can get HPV. Both men and women can get it – and pass it on to their sex partners- without even realizing it.

How common is cervical cancer in the U.S.? How many women die from it?
The American Cancer Society estimates that in 2006, over 9,700 women will be diagnosed with cervical cancer and 3,700 women will die from this cancer in the U.S.

How common are Genital Warts?
About 1% of sexually active adults in the U.S. (about 1 million people) have visible genital warts at any point in time.

Is HPV the same thing as HIV or Herpes?
HPV is NOT the same as HIV or Herpes (Herpes simplex virus or HSV). While these are all viruses that can be sexually transmitted— HIV and HSV do not cause the same symptoms or health problems as HPV.

Can HPV and its associated diseases be treated?
There is no treatment for HPV. But there are treatments for the health problems that HPV can cause, such as genital warts, cervical cell changes, and cancers of the cervix, vulva, vagina and anus.

Other ways to prevent HPV and Cervical Cancer

Another HPV vaccine is in the final stages of clinical testing, but it is not yet licensed. This vaccine would protect against the two types of HPV that cause most (70%) cervical cancers.

Are there other ways to prevent cervical cancer?
Regular Pap tests and follow-up can prevent most, but not all, cases of cervical cancer. Pap tests can detect cell changes in the cervix before they turn into cancer. Pap tests can also detect most, but not all, cervical cancers at an early, curable stage. Most women diagnosed with cervical cancer in the U.S. have either never had a Pap test, or have not had a Pap test in the last 5 years.

There is also an HPV DNA test available for use with the Pap test, as part of cervical cancer screening. This test is used for women over 30 or for women who get an unclear (borderline) Pap test result. While this test can tell if a woman has HPV on her cervix, it cannot tell which types of HPV she has.

Are there other ways to prevent HPV?
The only sure way to prevent HPV is to abstain from all sexual activity. Sexually active adults can reduce their risk by being in a mutually faithful relationship with someone who has had no other or few sex partners, or by limiting their number of sex partners. But even persons with only one lifetime sex partner can get HPV, if their partner has had previous partners.

It is not known how much protection condoms provide against HPV, since areas that are not covered by a condom can be exposed to the virus. However, condoms may reduce the risk of genital warts and cervical cancer. They can also reduce the risk of HIV and some other STIs, when used all the time and the right way.

New blood thinner Prasugrel proved better than Plavix!

Sunday, November 4th, 2007

PrasugrelA new blood thinner proved better than Plavix, one of the world’s top-selling drugs, at preventing heart problems after procedures to open clogged arteries, doctors reported Sunday. But the new drug also raised the risk of serious bleeding.

People given the experimental drug, prasugrel, were nearly 20 percent less likely to suffer one of the problems in a combined measure — heart attack, stroke or heart-related death — than those given Plavix, a drug that millions of Americans take to prevent blood clots that cause these events.

However, for each heart-related death that prasugrel (PRASS-uh-grell) prevented, compared to Plavix, almost one additional bleeding death occurred.

“There is a price to pay” for greater effectiveness, Dr. Deepak Bhatt, a Cleveland Clinic cardiologist, wrote in an editorial accompanying the results, which were published online by The New England Journal of Medicine and presented at an American Heart Association conference in Florida.

Still, many doctors said that on balance, the new drug comes out ahead, and offers great promise as a more potent alternative to Plavix, which costs $4 a day and does not work for many patients.

“I’m encouraged by the results” and think prasugrel should win Food and Drug Administration approval because it so dramatically cuts non-fatal heart attacks, said the Cleveland Clinic’s Dr. Steven Nissen, a frequent government adviser.

Doctors can sort out who might most benefit from it, such as diabetics, and who might face too much bleeding risk to use it, like the elderly, people who previously had strokes and those with kidney problems, he said. (The Cleveland doctors give to charity or the clinic the consulting and research fees they earn from drugmakers.)

Doctors also were waiting for prasugrel’s makers to clarify why they stopped two small studies of it a week ago. They said it was due to dosing problems but did not explain.

Prasugrel is being developed by Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly and Co. and a Japanese firm, Daiichi Sankyo Co. It could be a hugely important drug, and the study has been one of the most-watched tests of a novel heart medication in recent years.

Like Plavix, prasugrel prevents blood components called platelets from sticking together and forming a clot. Anti-platelet drugs are advised for most people with stents — tiny mesh tubes that keep arteries open after balloon angioplasty, an artery-clearing procedure that more than a million Americans have each year.

Plavix, sold by Sanofi-Aventis SA and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., has been the most effective drug of this type. More than 70 million people have taken it since it went on sale a decade ago.

Plavix had 18.6 million prescriptions and nearly $3 billion in U.S. sales last year, according to IMS Health, a healthcare information firm. Worldwide sales were nearly $6 billion.

The study comparing it to prasugrel involved 13,608 patients from 30 countries and was led by Dr. Elliott Antman at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston. Prasugrel’s makers paid for the study; many of the researchers work or consult for them.

Study participants were having angioplasty due to heart attacks or blockages causing sudden or worsening chest pain, and were randomly assigned to one drug or the other for six to 15 months.

The results: about 12 percent of people taking Plavix but only 10 percent on prasugrel suffered heart attacks, strokes or heart-related deaths — a 20 percent reduction in risk. Only 1.1 percent on the new drug developed blood clots in stents versus 2.4 percent on Plavix — a 52 percent lower risk. Prasugrel also worked faster than Plavix and showed more effectiveness at the first checkpoint — three days.

However, major bleeding occurred in 2.4 percent of those on prasugrel versus 1.8 percent of those on Plavix. This included brain or gastrointestinal bleeding, or after falls. Fatal bleeding was uncommon, but four times more frequent with the new drug.

Results hinted that some people might be in greater danger — those who had a previous stroke, were elderly, or weighed less than 132 pounds.

These signs are why prasugrel’s makers suspended two small studies a week ago to see whether such patients should be included in the study or should get a lower dose, said Dr. Anthony Ware of Eli Lilly.

“It was a precaution … because of a risk of a safety problem rather than an actual one,” he said.

Lilly will conduct another big study of prasugrel in people not having angioplasty but on medications because they are at risk of having a heart attack, Ware said.

That 10,000-person study will be led by Dr. E. Magnus Ohman at Duke University Medical Center.

In the study reported on Sunday, “the benefit clearly outweighs the risk” for most patients, Ohman said.

Bhatt of Cleveland Clinic noted that even aspirin — which is widely recommended to prevent clots and was prescribed to all patients in this study — carries a risk of bleeding.

Dr. Spencer King, a heart specialist at Piedmont Hospital in Atlanta and spokesman for the American College of Cardiology, was on the safety monitoring committee for the study. He said prasugrel would be “a little bit of a tough sell” to doctors who are comfortable with using Plavix, but that competition could give patients drugs more closely matched to their needs.

“We’ve had one size fits all … now we’ll have two choices,” King said.

Dr. Harlan Krumholz, a Yale University cardiologist with no role in the study, noted that “in absolute numbers, for every 1,000 people you treat, you’d save a lot more heart events than you’d cause bleeds,” because heart problems are more common.

Cost also keeps many people from taking Plavix now. Prasugrel’s makers have not said what it would cost, but “if they start competing on price, it could be a boon for the health care system,” Krumholz said.

Lilly’s Prasugrel Reduces Heart Risks But Has Higher Bleeding Rate

An experimental Eli Lilly & Co. blooding-thinning drug, prasugrel, was effective at reducing the number heart attacks, strokes and cardiovascular deaths, but carries a risk of serious bleeding, according to a new study released Sunday.

The study compared prasugrel and a similar anti-clotting drug, Plavix, by Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. and Sanofi-Aventis SA in 13,608 patients set to undergo a procedure to open blocked coronary arteries. Most patients then received a stent to keep the arteries open.

Overall, the study showed prasugrel was better than Plavix at reducing the number of heart attacks, strokes and cardiovascular deaths, but prasugrel had a higher rate of bleeding including fatal bleeding.

One of the study’s researchers, Elliott Antman, the director of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital’s cardiac unit, said patients on Prasugrel were 19% less likely to have a stroke, heart attack or death from a cardiovascular cause compared with patients on Plavix, but were 32% more likely to suffer a serious bleeding event. Patients on prasugrel were 24% less likely to suffer a heart attack compared with those on Plavix, Dr. Antman said.

Both drugs are designed to keep blood platelets from sticking together to form dangerous blood clots that can cause heart attacks and strokes. But they also carry a risk of bleeding if the drugs go too far at inhibiting platelets. Aspirin is also an anti-clotting agent and is commonly prescribed with Plavix.

The study, known as Triton, was presented Sunday at the American Heart Association’s annual meeting in Orlando and is also being published online in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Researchers, led by Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, said the net clinical benefit, which takes into account the benefits and risks of a drug, favors prasugrel. Dr. Antman said that for every 1,000 patients treated with prasugrel compared with Plavix, prasugrel would prevent an additional 23 heart attacks, but would likely cause six additional cases of serious bleeding.

Lilly, which is developing prasugrel with Daiichi Sankyo Co. of Japan, said Oct. 24 it halted two smaller studies of prasugrel amid concerns about the dosage used in certain patient groups, rattling investors and in turn, putting an even greater focus on the Triton data. Both Lilly and Daiichi funded the study.

Specifically, the Triton study showed that 12.1% of patients on Plavix had a heart attack, stroke or death from a cardiovascular cause during the study, compared with 9.9% of patients receiving prasugrel, which translates into an overall difference of 19%. Patients in the study were either given a one-time “loading” dose of prasugrel at 60 milligrams and maintenance doses of 10 milligrams, or a 300 milligram loading dose of Plavix followed by 75 milligram maintenance doses. Patients were treated for six to 15 months.

The rate of major bleeding among patients receiving prasugrel was 2.4% compared with 1.8% receiving Plavix. The study showed the rate of life-threatening bleeding was 1.4% for patients on prasugrel and 0.9% for patients on Plavix. That included fatal bleeding, which occurred among 0.4% of patients receiving prasugrel and 0.1% of patients on Plavix, along with non-fatal bleeding, which was 1.1% in the prasugrel group and 0.9% in the Plavix group.

Lilly has said it plans to submit an application for Food and Drug Administration approval of prasugrel by the end of this year.

“We are very pleased with the trial’s outcome and are excited by the potential for these results to help us further tailor prasugrel therapy to assure the greatest benefit from this novel treatment,” said J. Anthony Ware, Lilly’s cardiovascular platform leader for prasugrel.

Researchers said there were “significant reductions” in stent thrombosis and repeat procedures to reopen clogged arteries among patients on prasugrel compared with those on Plavix. The stent thrombosis rate, or blood clots attributed to the stent, was 1.1% for those receiving prasugrel and 2.4% for the Plavix patients, or a 52% reduction in the stent thrombosis rate for patients on Plavix. Urgent target vessel revascularization among prasugrel patients was 2.5% compared with 3.7% for those on Plavix, a 34% reduction.

In an accompanying editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine, Dr. Deepak Bhatt of The Cleveland Clinic, said for each additional cardiovascular death prevented by the use of prasugrel compared with Plavix, “approximately one additional episode of fatal bleeding was caused by prasugrel.” He wrote that prasugrel would probably benefit patients who are at high risk of additional heart problems such as a heart attack and at low risk of bleeding, while patients with a high risk of bleeding and at lower risk for heart attacks or strokes “may be better served by” Plavix.

Indeed, researchers wrote that an analysis of subgroups of patients in the study suggested those with a history of smoking, stroke, those age 75 and older as well as those who weighed less than 60 kilograms (132 pounds) had “less clinical efficacy and greater absolute levels of bleeding than the overall cohort.”

Dr. Antman said most of the excess bleeding and fatal bleeding occurred in patients who’ve suffered a previous stroke and said if approved, the drug shouldn’t be used in that group.

Plavix, which generated almost $6 billion in global sales last year, is among the world’s top-selling drugs. Lilly is hoping prasugrel, which some researchers said might work more consistently than Plavix, could take market share away from Plavix if it’s approved later next year.

In a statement, Bristol-Myers said “with the wealth of safety and efficacy data on Plavix, this drug is well understood by phsyicians in a real-world setting. The bleeding rate observed with prasugrel in Triton raises important questions.”

Lilly’s best selling drug Zyprexa loses U.S. patent protection in 2011 and prasugrel is widely viewed as the company’s most promising drug in its pipeline. Zyprexa treats schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

Other companies also are developing anti-clotting drugs, including AstraZeneca PLC and Schering-Plough Corp. along with Bayer AG and Johnson & Johnson, which are jointly working on a product.

Rivaroxaban submitted for approval

Saturday, November 3rd, 2007

RivaroxabanBayer HealthCare AG announced today the submission of a Marketing Authorization Application to the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EMEA) for approval to market rivaroxaban (Xarelto®) for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after major orthopedic surgery of the lower limbs. Rivaroxaban is an investigational, oral, once-daily direct Factor Xa inhibitor. Data from one of the pivotal studies (RECORD3) was presented prior to the EMEA submission and revealed that rivaroxaban significantly reduces the risk of VTE in patients undergoing total knee replacement surgery compared with enoxaparin, the current standard of care therapy. Rivaroxaban is being jointly developed by Bayer HealthCare and Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development, L.L.C.

“The submission of the data for VTE prevention to the EMEA is an important milestone in the development of this new treatment for the prevention of life-threatening blood clots,” said Dr. Kemal Malik, Head of Global Development and member of the Bayer HealthCare Executive Committee. “As an effective and convenient, once-daily oral treatment with a reassuring safety profile, we feel confident that rivaroxaban has the potential to set a new standard of care in the preventative treatment of thrombosis in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery.”

VTE is a type of thromboembolic disease that is caused by the obstruction of a blood vessel by a blood clot. In the EU it is estimated that there are 543,000 deaths due to VTE each year. People undergoing major surgery, in particular total knee or hip replacement, are prone to developing VTE due to a combination of factors such as prolonged bed rest, damage to blood vessels and an increased tendency of the blood to clot. It is estimated that up to 50% of patients undergoing lower limb surgery develop VTE if they do not receive preventative care.

The Marketing Authorization Application is based on data from three Phase III studies of rivaroxaban involving nearly 10,000 patients in total, and an extensive Phase I and Phase II program. One of the Phase III studies was in patients undergoing total knee replacement surgery, the results of which were presented at the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis (ISTH) in July 2007 (RECORD3). The results of the other two studies in patients undergoing hip replacement surgery (RECORD1 and RECORD2) will be presented at the upcoming 49th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) meeting, 8–11 December 2007.

About RECORD3
The results of this study in 2,531 patients undergoing knee replacement surgery revealed that once-daily oral rivaroxaban 10 mg was superior in preventing VTE to once-daily subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg, the current standard of care therapy. Specifically, patients in this RECORD3 study (REgulation of Coagulation in major Orthopedic surgery reducing the Risk of DVT and PE) who were treated with rivaroxaban demonstrated a 49% relative risk reduction (p<0.001) in the composite primary endpoint of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), non-fatal pulmonary embolism (PE) and all-cause mortality compared to those treated with enoxaparin. Patients treated with rivaroxaban also had a 62% reduced risk (p=0.01) of developing major VTE (the composite of proximal DVT, non-fatal PE and VTE-related death), the main secondary endpoint of the trial. Importantly, there was a similar low rate of major bleeding for patients being treated with rivaroxaban and enoxaparin (0.6% and 0.5%, respectively).

About Rivaroxaban (Xarelto®)
To date, rivaroxaban is the most studied oral direct Factor Xa inhibitor in development. More than 20,000 patients have been evaluated in the completed Phase II programs and enrolled thus far in the Phase III programs. More than 40,000 patients are expected to be evaluated in total.

Upon regulatory approval, rivaroxaban will be commercialized in Europe by Bayer Schering Pharma. A filing for rivaroxaban for a similar indication in the United States is planned in 2008, where if approved, it will be will commercialized by Scios Inc. and Ortho-McNeil, Inc., both of which are Johnson & Johnson companies.

The trade name of rivaroxaban is expected to be Xarelto®, pending health authority approval.

CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY: Rivaroxaban directly inhibits factor Xa therefore prolonging clotting times and reducing the formation of thrombin, an essential component to the development of thrombus formation. The L-shaped structure of rivaroxaban allows it to be highly selective for factor Xa.1, 3 This high selectivity allows the drug to inhibit free factor Xa, prothrombinase activity, and clot-associated factor Xa, giving it the ability to not only prevent clots from forming, but to also possibly break down clots already present. This drug does not have significant direct effects on thrombin or antithrombin activity.1, 3, 8 The mechanism of action of rivaroxaban is beneficial in the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic diseases.

PHARMACOKINETICS:

Absorption:

Peak plasma concentrations are reached 2 to 4 hours after oral administration, and the bioavailability of rivaroxaban ranges from 60-80%. The presence of food increased maximum concentration, time to maximum concentration, and AUC. Prothrombin time was also affected depending on if a patient was in a fed or fasting state. Maximum PT was increased by 53% (10mg) and 83% (20mg) if patients were fed compared to 44% (10mg) and 53% (20mg) in the fasting state. Maximum inhibition of factor Xa occurred within 1 to 4 hours after administration and ranged from 20-61% for the 5-80mg doses.

Distribution:

After multiple doses of rivaroxaban, dose-proportional increases in AUC were observed. It was also noted that once the drug reached steady state, there were no significant accumulations of the drug.1 It appears that body weight influences the volume of distribution, but this change has not been found to be significant.

A study by Kubitza et al. looked at the effects of extreme body weights (>= 120 kg and <= 50 kg) and gender on the PK and PD of rivaroxaban 10mg. Results showed no effects on Cmax in subjects >= 120 kg and up to a 24% increase in Cmax in subjects <= 50 kg. This increase in Cmax caused a slight increase in prothrombin time, but the investigators concluded that this was not clinically significant. No significant differences were seen between males and females as well. These results suggest that dose adjustments are not needed in patients with extreme body weights or between the different genders.

Metabolism:

It is unknown whether rivaroxaban is metabolized hepatically or renally. Other direct factor Xa inhibitors are metabolized by the liver, so there is a high probability that rivaroxaban is also metabolized through this route.

Elimination:

Rivaroxaban goes through both renal (66%) and biliary (28%) excretion, and 36% is excreted as unchanged drug in the urine. In young, healthy subjects, rivaroxaban has a half-life of around 9 hrs, but this number increases in elderly subjects (12 hrs) and patients with renal impairment. It has not been determined if dose-adjustments are needed in the elderly or renal impairment because of this increased half-life. In Phase III trials, patients with renal impairment received reduced doses of rivaroxaban. Most trials have excluded patients with creatinine clearances below 30 ml/min, but it has not been officially determined if this level of renal impairment required dosage adjustments.

PK parameters correlated closely with the inhibition of factor Xa activity and PT prolongation.

Because of its predictable pharmacokinetics, this drug does not require the routine monitoring like warfarin does.

DRUG INTERACTIONS: No significant drug interactions have been found with rivaroxaban, including with aspirin, NSAIDs, antacids, H2 antagonists and digoxin.

The interaction between rivaroxaban and aspirin was studied in a phase I trial to determine if aspirin influenced the effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban. This combination was well tolerated in the healthy, male subjects studied. Aspirin did not affect the inhibition of factor Xa activity or prolongation of PT/aPTT by rivaroxaban. In addition, rivaroxaban did not interfere with the inhibitory effects of aspirin on platelet aggregation.

A phase II study in 2007 looked at the effects of the combination of naproxen and rivaroxaban on safety, tolerability, PK and PD. Patients were given naproxen alone, rivaroxaban alone, or a combination of the two drugs. This study showed no mechanistic interaction between rivaroxaban and naproxen, and the addition of naproxen did not effect the prothrombin time, pTT or platelet aggregation. There was a significant increase in bleeding seen with the combination group, however, this increase was less than that seen with naproxen alone. Further phase III studies are being conducted to confirm the safety of this combination.

DOSING: There have been several studies that have looked at various dosing ranges of rivaroxaban, from 2.5mg to 40mg, given either twice-daily or once-daily. Most strengths of rivaroxaban have proven to be effective, and no dose-efficacy response has been established. However, twice daily dosing has resulted in significantly more bleeding than once-daily dosing suggesting that dose frequency might influence bleeding risk independently of dose intensity.

Rivaroxaban 20mg once-daily is the strength that is being used in Phase III trials looking at treatment of VTE and prevention of stroke in A. fib. During the RECORD3 study, a phase III trial, it was determined that 10mg of rivaroxaban given once daily was the most effective and safest dose at preventing VTE after orthopedic surgery. This strength is currently being evaluated further in this population.

CONCLUSION: There is a need for a new anticoagulant that is just as effective as warfarin, but without the rigorous monitoring schedule. Once-daily dosing of rivaroxaban has been shown to produce 24 hours of inhibition of factor Xa and thrombin generation, allowing for convenient dosing. Rivaroxaban offers once-daily dosing, and there may be the potential for no monitoring with this drug. Unlike warfarin that has several different strengths and may need to be taken differently each day, rivaroxaban will be much easier to manage and may increase patient compliance as well.

Related drugs

Ximelagatran, a direct thrombin inhibitor, was not marketed further due to its potential side-effects; the related compound dabigatran is undergoing studies. Together with rivaroxaban, the related factor Xa-inhibitor apixaban (Bristol-Myers-Squibb) andLY517717 (Lilly) are under development as non-monitored antithrombotic drugs.

65 percent of foreign drug makers may have never been inspected by FDA!

Friday, November 2nd, 2007

Foreign drug makersTwo-thirds of the foreign drug manufacturers subject to inspection by the Food and Drug Administration may never have been visited by agency inspectors, a government watchdog reported to Congress Thursday.

The FDA this year listed 3,249 foreign pharmaceutical manufacturers subject to its inspection — yet the agency cannot determine whether it has ever inspected 2,133 of them, according to a Government Accountability Office report released during a House subcommittee hearing.

While some of the more than 3,000 firms may never have exported prescription drugs or drug ingredients to the United States, others likely have.

Who are those firms and what are they shipping? asked Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., during Thursday’s hearing of the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on oversight and investigations.

“We don’t know and we are not certain the FDA knows,” Marcia Crosse, director of health care at the GAO, replied.

The few foreign inspections the FDA does conduct in any given year hit just 7 percent of the foreign drug makers exporting to the U.S., the GAO estimates. That means more than 13 years can pass before a foreign manufacturer is visited even once, Crosse said.

In the case of China, which with 714 drug firms boasts the largest number subject to FDA scrutiny of any country, the record is far worse. The FDA is slated to inspect just 13 Chinese establishments this year, meaning just 1.8 percent will see an FDA inspector, according to the GAO report.

In India, the No. 2 country, the record is far better. There, 65 of its 410 firms, or 15.8 percent, are slated for inspection this year, according to the GAO. That’s in line with the 16.8 percent of Swiss drug firms the FDA likely will inspect in 2007.

The GAO and Congress have long warned of the FDA’s shortcomings in its foreign drug inspection program. The GAO findings released Thursday largely reprise many of the same warnings outlined in a 1998 report.

“It’s deja vu all over again,” said Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich.

Nearly all U.S. drug makers are inspected at least once every two years, as mandated by a law drawn up long before imports seized a sizable chunk of the drug market. There is no such requirement that the FDA conduct foreign inspections with any regularity, even as imports of all kinds grow in volume. Concerns about the safety of imported drugs, food, toys and other consumer products have been at the fore for months.

“We’re finding ourselves again on the brink of one more problem dealing with imports into our country,” said Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas, adding that current FDA laws and regulations were never intended to handle the increasing volume of imports.

An estimated 80 percent of the active pharmaceutical ingredients used to make drugs sold in the U.S. are imported. Among finished drugs, an estimated 40 percent are made abroad.

The FDA plans to inspect just 300 foreign drug firms this year, announcing in advance its intent to do so each time. That can hinder the FDA’s ability to view normal, day-to-day operations, the GAO found. Further, FDA inspectors aren’t provided with translators, leaving them to rely on English-speaking firm employees.

Of those foreign inspections, 88 percent are of firms that make drugs awaiting FDA approval, according to the GAO. The balance are of the type of periodic assessment meant to ensure a company’s products remain safe in the years following FDA approval. Within the U.S., the proportion is flipped, with 78 percent of FDA drug inspections of the routine, surveillance variety.

The head of the FDA, meanwhile, said the issue is larger than just one of inspection numbers.

“The solution to ensuring the quality of imports does not rely solely on increasing the number of inspections we conduct abroad — or even at the border,” Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach said, adding that the FDA seeks to revamp its whole import strategy to focus on ensuring quality is built into agency-regulated products from the start. He also proposed posting FDA employees abroad, where they could help build up the agency’s foreign counterparts.

When FDA does visit foreign plants, its inspectors can make sometimes harrowing findings. A warning letter released Thursday by the FDA cited a Chinese manufacturer of pharmaceutical ingredients for a litany of problems, including rust, flaking paint and holes in the ceiling of the production area for an unnamed product.

Much of the uncertainty in the FDA’s handling of foreign drug makers stems from its outdated computer systems, which rely on multiple databases that contain sometimes conflicting information that can be compared only manually, the GAO found. Those databases, for instance, contain tallies of foreign drug firms subject to FDA inspection that range from roughly 3,000 to about 6,800, the GAO found.

“How can we have any confidence FDA is truly managing the risk that may come from foreign-made drug products if the FDA doesn’t know the exact number or location of foreign drug manufacturers,” Stupak said.

Some clarity should be forthcoming: The FDA is soliciting bids to have its worldwide registration database verified, said Margaret Glavin, the FDA’s associate commissioner for regulatory affairs.

Von Eschenbach acknowledged his agency’s computer infrastructure remains a problem. Still, he said the U.S. drug supply is among the world’s safest.

“We shouldn’t leave people with the impression the drug supply is unsafe — ” said William Hubbard, a former FDA associate commissioner.

“It’s vulnerable,” interjected Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., finishing his sentence.

FDA’s Scrutiny Of Drug Makers Abroad Faulted

The Food and Drug Administration only has inspection records for about one-third of the foreign manufacturers that may be making drugs for U.S. consumers, congressional investigators found.

The Government Accountability Office, an investigative arm of Congress, found that the FDA “could not identify a previous inspection” for 2,133 facilities out of 3,249 on a list the agency used to set its inspection priorities. The agency said some of those may not be exporting products to the U.S. At its typical pace of 241 annual examinations, the agency would only check on 7% of the manufacturers each year — taking more than 13 years to give each one a single inspection, the GAO said in a preliminary report.

The report said the FDA also is struggling to calculate precisely how many foreign drug makers it oversees; different agency databases provided varying estimates.

The report was released during a hearing of the House Energy and Commerce investigations subcommittee, chaired by Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak. The hearing turned the congressional spotlight, previously trained on the safety of imported consumer goods and foods, on the rapidly growing flow of pharmaceutical ingredients and drugs from China and India.

The GAO found that in fiscal 2007, the FDA inspected just 13 of China’s 714 drug makers who were potentially supplying the U.S. India had 410 facilities and 65 inspections for the year ended Sept. 30. Even when foreign manufacturers are inspected, the GAO found, FDA inspectors must rely on the companies for translators.

FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach said the agency is moving to improve its monitoring of foreign drug makers and upgrading the technology it uses to track them. The FDA “must revamp our entire strategy, our entire game plan,” he said. Former FDA officials said the agency has struggled with budget constraints on its inspection force.

Bruce Downey, chief executive of Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc., a generic and branded-drug maker, testified that U.S. drug companies do their own extensive checks on suppliers and consumers shouldn’t be alarmed about the quality of the U.S. drug supply. But, he said, there “isn’t a justification for” the disparity between the FDA’s inspections of domestic manufacturers — which by law must be checked every two years — and foreign ones, which don’t have a similar requirement.

Republicans on the committee questioned whether the concerns about oversight of foreign-made drug products had implications for efforts to allow freer importing of cheaper medicines from Canada and some other countries. Drug makers have argued that such a move would expose Americans to counterfeits and other risky medicines; backers of liberalized import policies say their bills would add new safety protections.