Acceder

Farmas USA

136K respuestas
Farmas USA
86 suscriptores
Farmas USA
Página
3.918 / 17.034
#31337

Re: Farmas USA

Datos AMRN

Objetivo principal: triglicéridos

La modificación porcentual media de triglicéridos desde el inicio al punto final (semana 12) fue del -18% para el grupo de 4 g de Vascespa, -6% para el grupo de 2 g de Vacespa y +6% para el grupo de placebo. La media de diferencia entre el grupo de 4 g y el placebo es del -22% (p>0,0001) y entre el grupo de 2 g y el pacebo -10% (p=0,005).

Objetivo secundario: colesterol de las LDL

Media de la diferencia entre el grupo de 4 g y el placebo = -6,2% (p=0,0067)
Media de la diferencia entre el grupo de 2 g y el placebo = -3,6% (p=0,0867)
Para los grupos de 4 g y 2g de Vacespa, el límit superior del intervalo de confianza al 97,5% (97,5% CI) fue de <6% (-1,7 y 0,5 respectivamente), lo que indica que las dosis no fueron infeiores al placebo. Además, el grupo de 4 g de Vascepa para el colessteorl LDL demostró ser superior al grupo con placebo.

Colesterol no HDL

Media de la diferencia en el colesterol no HDL con 4 g Vacespa = -5,0% (desde inicio a punto final en la semana 12)
Media de la diferencia en el colesterol no HDL con 2g Vacespa = +2,4% (p=0,0867) (desde inicio a punto final en la semana 12)
Media de la diferencia en el colesterol no HDL con placebo = +9,8%
Media de la diferencia entre el grupo de 4 g y el placebo para colesterol no HDL = -13,6% (p ajustado=0,0001)
Media de la diferencia entre el grupo de 2 g y el placebo para colesterol no HDL = -5,5% (p ajustado=0,0140)

Colesterol VLDL

Media de la diferencia en el colesterol VLDL con 4 g Vacespa = -12,1% (desde inicio a punto final en la semana 12)
Media de la diferencia en el colesterol VLDL con 2g Vacespa = +1,6% (desde inicio a punto final en la semana 12)
Media de la diferencia en el colesterol VLDL con placebo = +15% (desde inicio a punto final en la semana 12)
Media de la diferencia entre el grupo de 4 g y el placebo para colesterol VLDL = -24,4% (p ajustado=0,0001)
Media de la diferencia entre el grupo de 2 g y el placebo para colesterol VLDL = -10,5% (p ajustado=0,0170)

Colesterol HDL

Media de la diferencia en el colesterol HDL con 4 g Vacespa = -1,0% (desde inicio a punto final en la semana 12)
Media de la diferencia en el colesterol HDL con 2 g Vacespa = +0,0% (desde inicio a punto final en la semana 12)
Media de la diferencia en el colesterol HDL con placebo = +4,8%
Media de la diferencia entre el grupo de 4 g y el placebo para colesterol HDL = -4,5% (p ajustado=0,0013)
Media de la diferencia entre el grupo de 2 g y el placebo para colesterol HDL = -2,2% (p ajustado=0,1265)

Mechanism of Action
A single mechanism of action to explain the effects of omega-3 FA has not been identified. Instead, multiple pharmacologic effects are involved. Results from preclinical and clinical studies suggest that EPA 1) reduces hepatic very low-density lipoprotein triglyceride (VLDL-TG) synthesis or secretion and 2) enhances TG clearance from circulating VLDL particles

Extensive study has shown that EPA reduces TG synthesis or secretion by decreasing lipogenesis, increasing β-oxidation of fatty acids, and increasing degradation of apoB-100.9 EPA also accelerates TG clearance by increasing lipoprotein lipase (LPL) activity which promotes removal of TG from VLDL.

«Después de nada, o después de todo/ supe que todo no era más que nada.»

#31338

Re: Farmas USA

AMRN

Important Safety Issues With Consideration to Related Drugs

With regard to the only other FDA approved omega-3 fatty acid product (Lovaza), there have been four areas of potential safety concern: increases in LDL-C, liver enzymes, blood glucose, and a possible increase in bleeding risk.

The increase in LDL-C is thought to be due to the increased activity of LPL activity.4 This increased activity enhances the conversion of very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) and intermediate –density lipoproteins (IDL) to LDL-C.

The current Lovaza label states that patients with hepatic impairment should have ALT and AST monitored periodically during therapy . This stems from a greater number of patients with upward shifts in ALT levels, without a concurrent increase in AST shifts in the Integrated Summary of Safety (ISS) of Lovaza monotherapy trials.

Historically, some studies have raised concern that omega-3 ethyl ester consumption could increase fasting plasma glucose (FPG) without corresponding increase in Clinical Review Iffat Nasrin Chowdhury, MD NDA 202057 Vascepa/Icosapent Ethyl 14 HbA1C.5 However, a recent Cochrane meta-analysis suggested that neither the FPG nor the HbA1c increased with omega-3 ethyl ester therapy.
6
Pooled data from the Lovaza NDA datasets (post-hoc) showed a slight increase in median FPG in the Lovaza treatment group (median change +6.5mg/dL) as compared to the placebo group (+2 mg/dL).

Metabolism of omega-3 fatty acids, specifically EPA, produces eicosanoids of the thromboxane A3 and leukotriene 5 series, which are associated with reduced platelet aggregation, increased vasodilation, and inhibited leukocyte chemotaxis.
7
Omega-3 acid ethyl esters have been shown in vitro to significantly reduce platelet aggregation by reducing production of thromboxane A2 and increasing production of thromboxane A3.

The relationship of these in vitro findings to bleeding risk is much less clear. Currently the labeling for Lovaza includes cautionary statements with regard to bleeding risk. In addition to safety issues related to Lovaza,, ethyl EPA has been investigated in a large study in Japan.

In The Effects of eicosapentaenoic acid on major coronary events in hypercholesterolaemic patients (JELIS): a randomized open-la bel, blinded endpoint analysis, 18,645 Japanese patients were randomly assigned to either 1800 mg of EPA plus a statin or statin alone.

Safety concerns in this study included changes in creatine phosphokinase (CPK) and liver enzymes. Adverse effects (AEs) that were more common in the treatment group than in the control group included gastrointestinal disturbances, skin abnormality, and haemorrhage (cerebral, fundus, epitaxis, subcutaneous). No further information on bleeding events is available from the published JELIS report.

The Agency issued a review of the safety of EPA and DHA administered or consumed together in the Federal Register of June 5, 1997 (US FDA Substances Affirmed as Generally Recognized as Safe,

With respect to effects on bleeding time, the FDA concluded that although EPA and DHA appeared to cause small, dose-related increases in bleeding time of unclear clinical relevance, bleeding time increases associated with the use of 3g/day or less of EPA plus DHA either do not occur or are of no adverse significance.
With respect to the effects on glycemic control in type 2 diabetics, the FDA concluded that a dose-related effect is likely, and may be clinically relevant at high daily intake levels, but a daily intake if 3g/day or less of EPA and DHA causes no clinically significant effects on glycemic control.
With respect to effects of EPA and DHA on LDL-C, the FDA concluded that there appeared to be a trend toward increased LDL-C with increased fish oil consumption in all population subgroups, with a magnitude of the increase appearing greater in populations with abnormal blood lipid levels, hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.

Numerous studies have shown that both the major omega-3 FA, EPA and DHA, lower serum TG levels, but a study comparing the effects of EPA monotherapy to DHA monotherapy showed that DHA consistently had a more pronounced TG-lowering effect than EPA across all baseline concentrations of TG. This study also showed that DHA may be responsible for an increase in HDL-C whereas EPA may produce a small decrease in TC.
12
Thus EPA and DHA have differential effects on lipoprotein metabolism.

All individual SAEs occurred infrequently. The complete study report for the MARINE and ANCHOR trials were searched for additional cases of coronary artery disease, non-cardiac chest pain and subarachnoid hemorrhage and none were found. In addition to the two SAEs of subarachnoid hemorrhage, a search of the literature elicited no reports of subarachnoid hemorrhage in patients taking fish oil products.

In a systematic review by Desai et al, the potential interactions between dietary supplements and anti-platelet drugs were evaluated. Effects on bleeding time were evaluated with the combination of omega-3 FA and acetylsa licylic acid. Compared to baseline, significant increase (p<0.05) in bleeding time of 13-42% and 55-82% were observed with omega-3 FA alone or in combination with acetylsalicylic acid, respectively. In three trials the additional 19-44% increases in bleeding time with
combination therapy over acetylsalicylic acid were significant (p<0.05). The studies evaluated in the review were conducted with treatment durations of omega-3 FA and acetylsalicylic acid between 2 and 25 weeks.
20
Harris (2007) summarized clinical trials with omega-3 FA and findings related to bleeding complications. According to that author, the risk for clinically significant bleeding is “virtually nonexistent”.

This reviewer reviewed the narratives of the six cases of subdural hematoma, subdural hemorrhage, and subarachnoid hemorrhage reported in the NDA. There is no definitive answer as to whether omega-3 FA increases the risk for bleeding. Regulatory recommendations with Vascepa and concomitant anticoagulants should convey caution.

Y esto es genial:

Previous studies have demonstrated that the generation of reactive oxygen species and an excessive inflammatory reaction are in involved in the progression of neural damage following brain ischemia. In this study, we focused on the anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA). EPA treatment significantly inhibited DNA oxidative damage (P < .05) and accumulation of Iba1-positive cells in the CA1 area at 12 and 72 hours after the induction of isc
hemia, and also decreased apoptotic neurons and neuronal death (P < .001) at 72 hours after ischemia. EPA treatment also significantly improved memory function (P < .05). These findings suggest that EPA inhibits the inflammatory reaction and oxidative damage occurring after ischemic brain injury, and also may contribute to the prevention of neural damage and memory impairment following such injury.

Y con lo que he colgado está toda la información del documento.

«Después de nada, o después de todo/ supe que todo no era más que nada.»

#31339

Re: Farmas USA

pedazo curro, mucha info, genial!!

lo de la nota de CITI es simplemente esto:
"Standard 74 day letter appears very clean and appears even cleaner that received for the MARINE filing. The FDA's Day 74 letter is where the agency communicates any initial filing review issues and preliminary plans to hold a Advisory Comm meeting"

sabes lo que pienso?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsjx_z7EjBc&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dlsjx_z7EjBc

#31340

Re: Farmas USA

¿Fecha? Lo que me mosquea es que no nos enteremos de las cartas, y esta de la que hablas seguro que es otra nueva. La que yo comento debe de estar más que solventada ya.

Y tiene que estar limpia precisamente porque todo se ha requeteacordado y arreglado ya antes. Despegamos cagando leches.

Mola el tema.

«Después de nada, o después de todo/ supe que todo no era más que nada.»

#31341

Re: Farmas USA

la nota de CITI salio a la luz por los foros la misma semana que la dilucion, hace unos dias, atravea de twitter.
He intentando buscar el link original de la propia web de CITI para comprobar su veracidad y la fecha pero no lo he conseguido. Steven Rosenman comentó que ya habia hablado de ello ( yo no lo recuerdo), y me dio la impresion que esa carta de los 74 dias es la que recibio AMRN cuando la FDA aprobó la solicitud del NDA de ANCHOR muy a finales de Mayo.

#31342

Re: Farmas USA

Tiene sentido, pero la carta es lo que no tenemos y no sabemos qué dice. Tenemos que montar un hoja de excel con las noticias y una carpeta con los documentos fechados en Dropbox para todas las farmas.

«Después de nada, o después de todo/ supe que todo no era más que nada.»

#31344

Re: Farmas USA

AMRN

La carta no aparece en ningún lado.

Otra información importante:

De la comunicación de la reunión del Comité de la FDA
The safety data from both the MARINE and ANCHOR clinical trials were reviewed by the FDA as part of the approval of Vascepa in the MARINE indication and are reflected in the approved product labeling for Vascepa. As is customary practice at FDA, yesterday's notification from the FDA is the only communication confirming the need for such a meeting. The FDA advisory committee topics and questions to the committee are anticipated to be made public by the FDA on its website in the week preceding the meeting, consistent with FDA procedure.

Del informe anual:
FDA accepted for review Amarin’s sNDA for the ANCHOR indication that, upon approval, would enable Amarin to market and sell Vascepa for use in the ANCHOR indication. The FDA assigned a PDUFA action date of December 20, 2013 for this sNDA, which date is consistent with the standard FDA ten-month review period. The safety results from the ANCHOR trial are included in the current label for Vascepa. At a daily Vascepa dose of 4 grams, all of the primary and secondary efficacy endpoints of the ANCHOR trial were achieved.

The acceptance of the ANCHOR sNDA for review indicates that the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review by the FDA. -> ¿Ah, sí?
. We do not believe the final results of the REDUCE-IT study will be required for FDA approval of Vascepa for the ANCHOR indication.

A Special Protocol Assessment, or SPA, is an evaluation by the FDA of a protocol with the goal of reaching an agreement that the Phase 3 trial protocol design, clinical endpoints, and statistical analyses are acceptable to support regulatory approval of the drug product candidate with respect to effectiveness for the indication studied. The ANCHOR trial was, and the REDUCE-IT trial is, being conducted under an SPA with the FDA. The FDA agreed that, based on the information we submitted to the agency, the design and planned analysis of the ANCHOR trial is adequate to support use of the conducted study as the primary basis for approval with respect to effectiveness. An SPA is generally binding upon the FDA except in limited circumstances, such as if the FDA identifies a substantial scientific issue essential to determining safety or efficacy after the study begins, or if the study sponsor fails to follow the protocol that was agreed upon with the FDA. (Y ahora viene el disclaimer, pero es estándar: Even though we have received regulatory approval of Vascepa for the MARINE indication, there is no assurance that the FDA will not identify a scientific issue and deem either or both of the ANCHOR or REDUCE-IT SPAs no longer binding. Moreover, any change to a study protocol after agreement with the FDA is reached can invalidate an SPA. While we amended the protocol for the ANCHOR trial after the initial SPA evaluation was completed, we obtained the FDA’s evaluation of, and agreement to, the amendment. If, for example, the FDA does not consider the applicable SPA to be binding during its review of our regulatory approval applications, or if the FDA determines that we did not follow the SPAs appropriately, the agency could assert that additional studies or data are required to support approval of the application. )

«Después de nada, o después de todo/ supe que todo no era más que nada.»