Slo-Niacin vs Niaspan

Quote
Anonymous said:
Bottom Line! Niaspan was $120.00/month (with my insurance)......Slo-Niacin was $12.50......you do the math!
Click to expand...

I agree with your math. In my case, it would have been $81/30 Niaspan 500 for the 1st month and $141/30 Niaspan 1000 for the 2nd month. The Slo-Niacin was $18/100 which is enough for 30 pills this month, 60 pills next month (2 x 500 = 1000) with 10 pills and about $200 left over. Even the people that swear by the Niaspan admit that the difference in the 2 products is fairly minor. Unless you have tried the Slo-Niacin and it did't work for you, it's just not worth the extra money for the Niaspan and, if you are someone for whom the Slo-Niacin didn't work, maybe the problem is that Niacin doesn't work for you, not the delivery system.
 






Anonymous said:
There is a major difference between the safety of Niaspan and any form of dietary supplement slow niacin including the one offered from Upsher Smith. Don't make a decision based on what you read on this board. Do your own research and start with the FDA as well as organizations such as the American Heart Association that state "dietary supplement niacin must not be used ..." Slo-Niacin is a dietary supplement that would never pass the safety requirments of the FDA needed to become an approved prescription product.

Anyone that thinks there is no difference between Niaspan and Slo-Niacin is not up to date with their understanding of niacin.
Click to expand...
 


















Efficacy and safety evaluation of a large niacin therapeutic interchange program.
Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2013 May;47(5):657-64. doi: 10.1345/aph

Abstract
BACKGROUND:
An extended-release niacin product (Niaspan, Abbott Laboratories) was identified as a product with a less costly therapeutic alternative; a therapeutic product interchange was implemented.

OBJECTIVE:
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a product therapeutic interchange from Niaspan to a controlled-release niacin product (Slo-Niacin, Upsher-Smith Laboratories) among patients at a large US Department of Veterans Affairs health care facility.

METHODS:
Patients with active prescriptions for Niaspan underwent a therapeutic product interchange to Slo-Niacin; following conversion of the product, the medical record for each patient was reviewed and pre- and postconversion clinical information and conversion details were transcribed into a database for subsequent analysis and study. The primary efficacy end point was pre- and postconversion level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; secondary efficacy end points were levels of serum total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides. Abnormal serum liver enzyme levels greater than 3 times the upper limits of normal was the primary safety end point; blood hemoglobin A1c was assessed as a secondary safety end point.

RESULTS:
A total of 5321 patients' medical records were reviewed; for the efficacy evaluation, 539 patients were maintained on a daily dose of Slo-Niacin that was the same as the previous Niaspan dose. The dosage of any other concurrently prescribed dyslipidemia medication was unchanged. Analysis of these cases indicated that the conversion of Niaspan to Slo-Niacin was not associated with a difference in serum lipids over a mean (SD) of 503.9 (98.0) postconversion observation days with the exception of a decrease in mean serum triglyceride concentration of 19.8 mg/dL (p = 0.0003). Evaluation of all 5321 patients given Slo-Niacin for up to 724 days did not detect any safety differences between Slo-Niacin and Niaspan. Local facility cost avoidance exceeded $800,000 in the first postconversion year.

CONCLUSIONS:
Data from a medication use evaluation of modified-release niacin products therapeutic interchange in a large US Department of Veterans Affairs health care facility show that the switch from Niaspan to Slo-Niacin had no negative effects on lipid-altering efficacy or safety but generated significant cost avoidance.

PMID:23613096 DOI:10.1345/aph.1R736
 






anonymous said:
Efficacy and safety evaluation of a large niacin therapeutic interchange program.
Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2013 May;47(5):657-64. doi: 10.1345/aph

Abstract
BACKGROUND:
An extended-release niacin product (Niaspan, Abbott Laboratories) was identified as a product with a less costly therapeutic alternative; a therapeutic product interchange was implemented.

OBJECTIVE:
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a product therapeutic interchange from Niaspan to a controlled-release niacin product (Slo-Niacin, Upsher-Smith Laboratories) among patients at a large US Department of Veterans Affairs health care facility.

METHODS:
Patients with active prescriptions for Niaspan underwent a therapeutic product interchange to Slo-Niacin; following conversion of the product, the medical record for each patient was reviewed and pre- and postconversion clinical information and conversion details were transcribed into a database for subsequent analysis and study. The primary efficacy end point was pre- and postconversion level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; secondary efficacy end points were levels of serum total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides. Abnormal serum liver enzyme levels greater than 3 times the upper limits of normal was the primary safety end point; blood hemoglobin A1c was assessed as a secondary safety end point.

RESULTS:
A total of 5321 patients' medical records were reviewed; for the efficacy evaluation, 539 patients were maintained on a daily dose of Slo-Niacin that was the same as the previous Niaspan dose. The dosage of any other concurrently prescribed dyslipidemia medication was unchanged. Analysis of these cases indicated that the conversion of Niaspan to Slo-Niacin was not associated with a difference in serum lipids over a mean (SD) of 503.9 (98.0) postconversion observation days with the exception of a decrease in mean serum triglyceride concentration of 19.8 mg/dL (p = 0.0003). Evaluation of all 5321 patients given Slo-Niacin for up to 724 days did not detect any safety differences between Slo-Niacin and Niaspan. Local facility cost avoidance exceeded $800,000 in the first postconversion year.

CONCLUSIONS:
Data from a medication use evaluation of modified-release niacin products therapeutic interchange in a large US Department of Veterans Affairs health care facility show that the switch from Niaspan to Slo-Niacin had no negative effects on lipid-altering efficacy or safety but generated significant cost avoidance.

PMID:23613096 DOI:10.1345/aph.1R736
Click to expand...
 
























Top Bottom
Back
Quote