• Wed news: BioNTech buying Biotheus. FDA’s Califf lists hopes for his successor. Amgen loses $12B market cap from hidden spreadsheet tab. TRex Bio raises $84M. London is Europe’s life science capitol. See more on our front page

Interesting analysis of responders and clinical trials

Quote
Thank you Eisai reps. Since you have been in the field talking about obesity, my TRXs have nearly doubled. When it's all said and done, my docs are choosing the superior product, Qsymia. See ya', wouldn't wanna be ya!
 




Anonymous said:
Belviq's -.9 effect on a1c was due to the fact that patients were not well controlled at the time they started on Belviq. Qsymia trials in diabetics had a drop in a1c of -.4 but the patients a1c was already pretty well controlled at a baseline of 6.8. Belviq's baseline was 8.1 if memory serves me correctly. MUCH easier to show big drops in a1c the higher the baseline is. If you don't believe me just ask you endos!

Qsymia is a more effective drug than Belviq. Phentermine is only a hold up for some docs. There are millions of scripts each year for Adipex so don't think docs wont write Qsymia because of its phentermine component. Topirimate is also not a real issue. Ask all those neurologist how many of the have their patients of childbearing potential on 2 forms of birth control and monthly pregnancy tests. Most of them will tell you zip, zero, nada.

Where Belviq might have an advantage is in marketing. Apparently Vivus senior mgmt had no clue how to market in this huge arena so First Manhattan has now overthrown mgmt and will implement its own strategy. Only time will tell what effect it will have.

But, make no mistake, Qsymia Is by far the more effective drug. I happen to sell Qsymia and hope we are all successful (maybe us a little more than you). Their ate "tons" of patients that desperately need help with obesity.
Click to expand...

Ah you're giving Eisai marketing too much credit...it is the bottom of the barrel here too...J&J did the heavy lifting on Aciphex and Pfizer with Aricept...don't get the oncology folks started on the dismal job they do on that side of the house...
 








how could anyone say or dispute the effectiveness of controlling A1c for two drugs that have not been compared in H2H trials? that's your bad. and speaking for belviq, check out the start and finish A1c of the well controlled and the poorly controlled diabetics. It looks great, said the endo. Can I have more vouchers that work longer than the 3 month qsymia vouchers?
 




Your Endo must have gone to the U of Duh if he believes B controls A1C. B nor Q control A1C. People like you, the uneducated rep, is what gives the few of us good reps a harder time gaining credibility. After listening to idiots like you, they either assume all reps are stupid, or, are delighted to have an intelligent conversation with me. I am not going to give you any pointers jr, I will let you run around acting stupid. Put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig, meaning, a 5 year voucher for a ineffective, less safe, more expensive drug, is still a worthless, 5 year voucher. Voucher lengths mean nothing, changes occur constantly. One thing that can't change, limited efficacy of your crappy med.
 




Lorcaserin

5-HT2c receptors (5-HT2c R) have long been implicated in the control of food intake and glucose homeostasis. Evidence comes from both genetic and pharmacological experiments. In fact, new research, within the last 2-3 years has identified 5-HT2c R agonists as potentially useful for type 2 diabetes. This finding was confirmed by utilizing mice that have genetically absent 5-HT2c receptors. These mice develop hyperinsulinemia, type 2 diabetes and obesity as they age.

Studies utilizing mice without these receptors have changed the view that weight loss alone is sufficient to improve glucose control and insulin sensitivity. A study by Zhou and colleagues [Zhou et al. Serotonin 2C receptor agonists improve type 2 diabetes via melanocortin-4 receptor signaling pathways. Cell Metab 6, 398-405 (2007)] demonstrated that 5- HT2c R agonists had positive effects (improvement of glucose) at doses below those needed to see effects on food intake or body weight, indicating that a weight loss-independent role for 5HT2c R agonist in glucose regulation was operative.

What this indicates is that glucose control is mediated in the CNS and therefore medications that act on the sites that are responsible for glucose regulation can do so apart from weight loss alone. And this is where lorcaserin has its mode of action – activation of 5-HT2c receptors expressed on proopiomelanocortin (POMC) neurons in the arcuate nucleus of the hypothalamus. It is here that lorcaserin effects both weight loss and glucose regulation – that is, glucose improvement is not only the result of weight loss but also to lorcaserin’s effect through the POMC neurons as a result of 5-HT2c R agonism.
 




Anonymous said:
Lorcaserin

5-HT2c receptors (5-HT2c R) have long been implicated in the control of food intake and glucose homeostasis. Evidence comes from both genetic and pharmacological experiments. In fact, new research, within the last 2-3 years has identified 5-HT2c R agonists as potentially useful for type 2 diabetes. This finding was confirmed by utilizing mice that have genetically absent 5-HT2c receptors. These mice develop hyperinsulinemia, type 2 diabetes and obesity as they age.

Studies utilizing mice without these receptors have changed the view that weight loss alone is sufficient to improve glucose control and insulin sensitivity. A study by Zhou and colleagues [Zhou et al. Serotonin 2C receptor agonists improve type 2 diabetes via melanocortin-4 receptor signaling pathways. Cell Metab 6, 398-405 (2007)] demonstrated that 5- HT2c R agonists had positive effects (improvement of glucose) at doses below those needed to see effects on food intake or body weight, indicating that a weight loss-independent role for 5HT2c R agonist in glucose regulation was operative.

What this indicates is that glucose control is mediated in the CNS and therefore medications that act on the sites that are responsible for glucose regulation can do so apart from weight loss alone. And this is where lorcaserin has its mode of action – activation of 5-HT2c receptors expressed on proopiomelanocortin (POMC) neurons in the arcuate nucleus of the hypothalamus. It is here that lorcaserin effects both weight loss and glucose regulation – that is, glucose improvement is not only the result of weight loss but also to lorcaserin’s effect through the POMC neurons as a result of 5-HT2c R agonism.
Click to expand...

Nice try. And how many of your diabetics actually responded in your studies? Uh yea. Exit gracefully please!
 




























Anonymous said:
You're a liar, and not an Eisai salesman - here to corrupt the minds of REAL salesmen. EXPOSED.

"bottom line, we are much less effective, less safe, more potential to interact with other meds, 5h2a,b risk minimal or not, a risk, bid,ore expensive, serotonin synd., half as effective."

WE? You sound like one of the nervous short sellers especially when you say things like "less safe". Have you had any training on Belviq's safety? It's awesome. Beats Qsymia hands down.

Not sure if I'll buy the "WE".

Maybe a matter of perspective but perhaps more a matter of having the right information.

1) Belviq's efficacy is comparable to Qsymia's recommended dose.
2) Doctors understand responder data is what counts.
Completers lost an average of 8.2% of body weight (average 26 pounds). Responders (those who lost 5% in 3 months) lost between 11% and 12% of body weight in a year. 47.5% of patients who took BELVIQ lost at least 5% of their weight versus 20.3% for placebo patients. Of those completing the studies, 63.9% lost greater than 5% of their weight, 34.7% lost greater than 10% of their weight, and the top 25% lost over 16.7% (or 35 pounds). It has been scientifically proven that even a 5% drop in weight can result in meaningful improvements in overall health.

"Oh, ok dr, they are 2x more effective, safer"

Moto of short sellers. Doctors write scripts not hedge funds. Safer? Did you say SAFER? Dead giveaway. You're a liar, and not an Eisai salesman - here to corrupt the minds of REAL salesmen. EXPOSED.

2 times more effective? BS. According to what study comparing the two? Did you know the trial designs were different? And B's 8.2% and 11-12% completer / responder efficacy is VERY comparable to Q.
Click to expand...

Where did u find 8.2% /26 lbs? And. 11-12% completer? I don't see it anywhere.
 
Last edited by a moderator:




Top Bottom
Back
Quote