sitagliptin -- ??more drug company shenanigans.

The preliminary results of the TECOS trial (Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin) was just released by the drug company (Merck), though formal release is expected in June at the Am Diabetes Assn meeting (and, i do not have an advanced copy to critique in detail).  This issue takes on added importance since there were 2 other large trials released recently on other DPP-4 inhibitors (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors) finding possible increases in hospitalizations for heart failure. the SAVOR-TIMI 53 trial found a significant 27% increased hospitalization rate for heart failure in those randomized to saxagliptin (though no effect on cardiovascular outcomes overall, defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, or nonfatal ischemic stroke). the EXAMINE trial found a trend to higher heart failure hospitalization in those of alogliptin. based on these findings the FDA did recommend that these trials' results be added to the drugs' labels.  the TECOS trial, as reported by the drug company (see their press release: http://www.mercknewsroom.com/news-release/prescription-medicine-news/merck-announces-trial-evaluating-cardiovascular-outcomes-sit ), randomized 14,724 patients from 38 countries with a history of diabetes and cardiovascular disease to sitagliptin (Januvia) vs placebo and followed them 3 years, finding that it "achieved its primary endpoint of non-inferiority for the composite cardiovascular endpoint. among secondary endpoints, there was no increase in hospitalization for heart failure in the sitagliptin group versus placebo".

so, the issues here:
--the DPP-4 inhibitors add small amounts to diabetic control (varies somewhat depending on initial A1C, but in general about 0.5% decrease)
--the FDA several years ago allowed diabetic drugs to be marketed based only on A1C levels, a surrogote marker. there are no data on the clinical outcomes withSchedule
 DPP-4 inhibitors (and, i do find it a tad disconcerting that the Am Diab Assn, in their latest update, gives DPP-4 inhibitors an equal footing to all of the other alternatives as the second drug to use after metformin, though at least there are some data that others have some clinical benefit -- eg insulin, sulfonylureas, pioglitazone)
--Sitagliptin made $6 billion for Merck in 2014
--as succinctly put:  "Sanjay Kaul, a frequent FDA adviser, pointed out the paradox of the larfge commercial success of sitagliptin despite the absence of any proven clinical benefit: 'So, we have a drug that yields modest glycemic efficacy, is neutral with respect to cardiometabolic factors (lipids, weight, blood pressure), does not kill you or land you in a hospital, and yet is a blockbuster drug nearly five times over! What is the big news here? That it does not kill you or land you in a hospital? Or that it is a blockbuster drug nearly five times over without evidence of microvascular or macrovascular outcome benefit? Miracle of medicine or miracle of marketing?'   http://www.forbes.com/sites/larryhusten/2015/04/27/cardiovascular-outcomes-with-mercks-januvia-no-better-or-worse-than-conventional-care/, also quoted in Physician's First Watch)

Comments

Post a Comment

if you would like to receive the near-daily emails regularly, please email me at gmodest@uphams.org

Popular posts from this blog

HDL a negative risk factor? or cholesterol efflux??

Although the data on HDL being protective of atherosclerotic disease is pretty consistent, there are negative studies, and the data on medications which dramatically improve HDL levels (eg, the cholesteryl ester transfer protein --CETP --inhibitors, such as torcetrapib) are clinically disappointing. there have been several explanations for this. for example, some HDL particles are "pro-inflammatory" and elicit an atherosclerotic response (which may be related to apolipoprotein C-III). a new article in NEJM highlights another angle -- that the issue is not the HDL number, but HDL's functionality in the reverse transport of cholesterol, as measured by the cholesterol efflux capacity (see  lipids HDL efflux capacity vs amt NEJM 2014 in dropbox, or  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1409065). This article looks at the Dallas Heart Study, where they measured HDL levels, HDL particle concentrations, and cholesterol efflux capacity in 2924 adults free of cardiovascular disease and followed p
Read more

Drug company shenanigans: narcolepsy drug

I have not done a blog for a long time on drug company shenanigans. So it is my great pleasure to bring up a brand-new drug company approach to garner huge amounts of money (see  https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/28/business/jazz-narcolepsy-avadel-patents.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare  ).  Based on an article by  Rebecca Robbins of the New York Times, who has written several articles on drug company excesses   As background, this will be my 42 nd  such blog: for the array, see  https://bucommunitymed.wpengine.com/page/4/?s=drug+company+shenanigans   Th e drug company  approach  this time  to extending  their  patents has a few “interesting” angles: -- this is a medication manufactured by Jazz Pharmaceuticals to treat narcolepsy: there are 2 versions: Xyrem and Xywav (Xywav has less sodium, so is marketed to those who should be on a low sodium diet). These meds are basically derivatives of gammahydroxybutyric acid (GHB)      -- the drug actually has a pretty
Read more

UPDATE: ASCVD risk factor critique

  I decided to do an extensive update of my prior ASCVD (atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease) risk analysis and critique of risk calculators, with much more information about the “non-traditional” risk factors. I felt that there should be more data/clarification, since I think we are really undertreating/not preventing the most common cause of death by relying on the ASCVD risk calculators   -- Cardiovascular risk models:      -- many of us rely on the various cardiovascular risk models to determine the appropriate approach to patients, and these are often integrated into the electronic medical records      -- these risk models have several very important limitations:          -- they are typically based on community data, eg from the Framingham study etc. But, in clinical practice, we are dealing with the individual and not the community:              -- there is very clear evidence that there are many individual risk factors that are associated with increased risk of a cardiovascu
Read more