The current issue of the New England Journal of Medicine continues the journal's recent skeptical approach to the business practices of pharmaceutical companies. A perspectives article (Avorn J. Torcetrapib and atorvastatin - should marketing drive the research agenda? N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 2573-2576) reviews Pfizer's trials of a new drug that may boost HDL ("good") cholesterol, torcetrapib, but only in fixed combination with Pfizer's block-buster "statin," Lipitor (atorvastatin).
Since the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved this approach, should the trials be succesful, Pfizer would be allowed to market the new torcetrapib-atorvastatin combination as a brand-name drug beyond 2010, when its patent on Lipitor runs out. The FDA approval also would allow Pfizer to avoid the risk of anti-trust litigation, which otherwise might have been engendered by it offering a drug only when "bundled" with another of its products.
The trials would not result in any information about how torcetrapib performs alone, or in combination with a statin other than atorvastatin. Physicians would not have the options of prescribing torcetrapib alone, in combination with generic atorvastatin, or in combination with another statin. Thus this approach would limit scientific data available to physicians and researchers, and would limit therapeutic options for patients.
We previously posted about this issue here, based on a March New York Times article.
Avorn commented,
Maybe now that the NIH has strict conflict-of-interest rules, and top NIH officials are no longer allowed to get lucrative consulting contracts with pharmaceutical companies, (see post here), this idea will get more welcome reception there.
Since the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved this approach, should the trials be succesful, Pfizer would be allowed to market the new torcetrapib-atorvastatin combination as a brand-name drug beyond 2010, when its patent on Lipitor runs out. The FDA approval also would allow Pfizer to avoid the risk of anti-trust litigation, which otherwise might have been engendered by it offering a drug only when "bundled" with another of its products.
The trials would not result in any information about how torcetrapib performs alone, or in combination with a statin other than atorvastatin. Physicians would not have the options of prescribing torcetrapib alone, in combination with generic atorvastatin, or in combination with another statin. Thus this approach would limit scientific data available to physicians and researchers, and would limit therapeutic options for patients.
We previously posted about this issue here, based on a March New York Times article.
Avorn commented,
- "the current trial design may not optimally meet the scientific needs of prescribers, the clinical needs of patients, the economic needs of payers, or the regulatory needs of policymakers. But they superbly meet the business needs of the sponsore - to create new knowledge in a way that will protect the market share of the largest drug company's most important product."
Maybe now that the NIH has strict conflict-of-interest rules, and top NIH officials are no longer allowed to get lucrative consulting contracts with pharmaceutical companies, (see post here), this idea will get more welcome reception there.
Artikel Terkait
Princess Health and How the Anechoic Effect Persists: The Case of the Continued Punishment of Dr Elliott . PrincessicciaWe have frequently discussed the anechoic effect, how evidence and opinions that challenge the dysfunctional status quo- Princess Health and "Scientists Behaving Badly" and "Unreasonable Managerial Demands". PrincessicciaAn article in Nature reports on "Scientists Behaving Badly."(1) This was a broadly based anonymous survey, with a 52% r
- Princess Health and The Kelo Case, Pfizer, and Conflicts of Interest.PrincessicciaThere has been quite a lot published both in main-stream media and on blogs about the Kelo case, so I have hesitated ab
- Princess Health and "Seeking Justice for My Son". PrincessicciaAt Healthcare Renewal we often write of the dangers of financial conflict of interest towards medical research and prac
- Princess Health and Pfizer Dissident Unplugged.PrincessicciaThe New York Times reported that Dr. Peter Rost, a Pfizer executive who publicly spoke out in favor of importation of l
- Princess Health and An Australian Survey of Threats to Research Integrity. PrincessicciaAnother important article on threats to the integrity of clinical research has appeared in the Medical Journal of Austr
Princess Health and "Crying All the Way to the Bank" Revisited: Pfizer's Trials of Torcetapib-Atorvastatin.Princessiccia
4/
5
Oleh
Gusty
