IMPROVE IT is Positive!

Will be announced tomorrow. Jobs for awhile . Zeev

 

Number needed to treat. Is 50.
ldl is 53 versus 70 mg/dl.
Reduces cardiac events.

 

Another sucrets.

 

Will a 6.4% relative risk reduction taking Vytorin vs simvastation sway insurance companies enough to pay for it? Key question!

 

Crestor still looks like a better option.

 

Good for VYTORIN!
Finally a valid clinical outcomes trial with positive results---too late to make any difference?

Whoever designed and approved the earlier surrogate endpoint trial was an idiot.
It had no chance of showing desired results. Early atherosclerosis "regression" trials required huge reductions in LDL to show the slightest changes in angiograms, IMT, etc.

Comparing ZETIA/ZOCOR to ZOCOR alone in a "regression" study was destined for failure from the outset and the idea should have been canned. Lowering LDL another 16% would show little to no difference vs. the control group.

VYTORIN and ZETIA sales suffered greatly and unnecessarily for someone's utter stupidity.
And it underscores how Merck fell from vanguard to dud status in less than a decade.

 

I'm glad (and surprised) that the results are positive.

My question is given the results are positive, why did it take so long to get this out???? It should not have taken that long to clean the data, run the analysis and write up the results for both publications and FDA submission that it did. Lots of lost sales due to the delay.

 

That idiot would be Peter Kim who signed off on that trial despite being told how risky it would be.

 

This thread is very interesting. Just so I understand, and I am a former basic chemistry drone from years ago, what study/trial should have been conducted to maximize the positives of Vytorin vs. Zocor?

 

Its was not Peter Kim who signed off it was a JV decision.

 

None. Physicians already bought into the idea that the lower the LDL the better, and Vytorin does the job better than Zocor (or Crestor for that matter) period. As mentioned above, designing a study showing vytorin to have superior outcomes as it pertains to any regression of plaques, is very difficult (as we since have found out), and frankly, was unnecessary because physicians already connected the dots of lower LDL = better with or without head to head clinical studies. This was one instance where Merck should have taken advice from the gaggle of lawyers who run this company and stuck to the long standing trial lawyer axiom of never asking a question to a witness in court that you already don't know the answer to

 

Horse Shit!

 

Regression has always been Stevie Nissan Bullshit (kinda like having sex with your older ugly sister) nobody wants to tell about it cause everyone is ashamed! The ability to measure regressed plaques has always been on the same level as 'Al Gore' and global warming....for all you idiots in Watertown N.Y. today! It probably matters what LDL you lower and what HDL you raise far more than any micron drop in plaque IMT!

 

Our sales force continues to get trimmed so we can be " more flexible, and adjust to market eve td quicker."

The. We're told this trial might be in the PI by summer? 9 months later? What a pack of fuckasses running this company.

 

There is no question about that.

 

All of you mind-numbed Merck idiots will have to pardon me, but I don't believe a damn thing that comes out of Merck.

 

Thank you for the succinct answer.

 

Then go sell that dog. Oh wait, you already do.

 

crestor has zero data to show better outcomes than a generic statin.
in fact, what limited data there is shows no difference between outcomes on generic versus crestor.
not sure how they keep selling so much of it without outcomes versus lipitor.
even the LDL lowering is pretty similar to high dose atorva.
all those misleading ads comparing crestor 10 to lipitor 10 finally paid off. docs think crestor is more effective because they picked a higher dose of crestor to a lower dose of lipitor in their head to head trial.

 

Life isn't fair, and many MDs justify their Rx choices using the "class effect" rationale. Lipitor prospered when the Simva Survival Study was published. Lipitor sales skyrocketed despite the absence of long-term clinical/safety outcomes data. Fault the doctors who apply this selective standard.

Does every cardiologist think that all cardiologists are alike? No. They don't apply the "class effect" to their own situation, but they gladly give a free ride to drug companies that don't take the risks and incur costs associated with large outcomes trials.

Years ago, MDs applied the "class effect" to NSAIDs.
They were all alike, no difference---until several NSAIDs were removed from the market due to safety concerns (e.g. ZOMAX). Oops.