Monday, August 26, 2013

Reunión de Especialistas en VIH de LatAm por nuevas recomendaciones de la OMS para el uso de nuevo Medicamento
Especialistas de la OMS y de otras entidades encabezarán jornada regional para analizar los avances de la lucha contra la enfermedad, y nuevas directrices para mejorar la eficacia de los antirretrovirales  La OMS recomienda suministrar los fármacos de manera temprana.
A fines de junio de este año, expertos de todo el mundo se reunieron para analizar una serie de nuevas recomendaciones para el uso de medicamentos contra el Sida. De ese encuentro salió un manual actualizado para el manejo de antirretrovirales, que modifica, entre otras indicaciones, que los mismos deberán ser suministrados de forma temprana para mejorar su efectividad contra la enfermedad. El nuevo plan de manejo de los fármacos llegará el 26 de Agosto a la Argentina, cuando especialistas de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y de la oficina de la ONU contra el Sida (ONUSIDA) presenten en el país estos nuevos aspectos técnicos del manejo de los medicamentos. Durante la jornada se presentará un mapa de la situación de los fármacos en toda la región. 

La presentación de la denominada “Directrices unificadas sobre el uso de medicamentos antirretrovíricos para el tratamiento y la prevención de la infección por el VIH” contará con la presencia de subsecretaria de Prevención y Control de Riesgos de la cartera sanitaria nacional, Marina Kosacoff; el asesor en VIH de la OMS, Massimo Ghidinelli; el director regional de ONUSIDA, César Nuñez y el director de Sida del ministerio de Salud de Brasil, Fabio Mesquita.

Las nuevas directrices de la OMS proveen recomendaciones basadas en la evidencia para el enfoque de Salud Pública en los aspectos clínicos, programáticos y operativos para el uso estratégico de medicamentos antirretrovirales para la Prevención y el Tratamiento de la infección de VIH. Se prevé que estas indicaciones tendrán repercusiones significativas en los Programas Nacionales de VIH para el logro de las metas y objetivos de acceso universal, y la eliminación de la transmisión vertical del VIH para el año 2015.

La reunión, organizada conjuntamente por Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS), la OMS, el Grupo de Cooperación Técnica Horizontal (GCTH) de VIH de la región de las Américas, y los Ministerios de Salud de Argentina y Brasil, contará con la participación de miembros del GCTH; jefes de programas Nacionales de VIH; miembros de organizaciones de la sociedad civil; representantes de OPS, OMS, ONUSIDA, UNICEF y expertos regionales de farmacorresistencia del VIH.

En el encuentro de junio, los expertos crearon esta especie de manual para el uso de los medicamentos, donde se recomendó el inicio más temprano del tratamiento antirretrovírico. “Pruebas recientes indican que un tratamiento más temprano ayudará a los infectados por el VIH a vivir más tiempo y con mejor salud, además de reducir sustancialmente el riesgo de transmisión del virus”, informaron. El consejo se basó en nuevos datos que revelan que a finales de 2012 había 9,7 millones de personas en tratamiento con estos fármacos que pueden salvarle la vida a los pacientes.

En las nuevas recomendaciones se alienta a todos los países a que inicien el tratamiento de los adultos infectados por VIH cuando la cifra de linfocitos CD4 sea igual o inferior a 500/mm³, es decir, mientras el sistema inmunitario todavía es fuerte. La recomendación anterior de la OMS, establecida en 2010, era ofrecer tratamiento cuando dicha cifra fuera igual o inferior a 350/mm³. El 90 por ciento de los países han adoptado la recomendación de 2010, y algunos, como Argelia, Argentina o Brasil, ya están ofreciendo tratamiento a los pacientes con 500 células/mm³.

Cabe recordar que según las leyes nacionales, cuando una persona recibe el diagnóstico de la enfermedad tiene derecho a recibir la medicación. Para quienes tienen obra social, la ley nacional 24.455 obliga a las entidades a hacerse cargo en un 100 por ciento de los tratamientos. Para quienes tienen un contrato con una empresa de medicina prepaga, la ley 24.754 establece lo mismo. 

En tanto, para las personas sin cobertura médica, la dirección de Sida y ETS del ministerio de Salud de la Nación asegura la provisión la medicación para todas las personas que lo requieran en todo el país.

Las estadísticas argentinas estiman que en el país hay cerca de 130 mil personas con VIH, pero Marina Kosacoff, subsecretaria de Prevención y Control de Riesgos del ministerio de Salud nacional, señaló que "se considera que la mitad conoce su condición, por eso la importancia de que la gente se interese para hacerse voluntariamente el análisis". La funcionaria destacó que "a nivel regional Argentina es pionera en el tratamiento del Sida y el acceso universal, logrando buenos niveles de adherencia al mismo".

Otros encuentros

Además de la presentación de las directrices sobre medicamentos, el encuentro en Capital Federal servirá para revisar otros aspectos de la lucha contra la enfermedad. Por la mañana, a las 9, se llevará a cabo la Reunión Anual del Grupo de Cooperación Técnico Horizontal (GCTH), que también reunirá a representantes de los Programas Nacionales de Sida de América Latina y El Caribe, líderes de once redes de la sociedad civil que trabajan en VIH, y representantes de OPS, OMS y ONUSIDA, para evaluar los resultados del plan estratégico y definir las nuevas líneas de acción para la región en materia de VIH.

Durante este encuentro, el director de Sida y Enfermedades de Transmisión Sexual de la cartera sanitaria nacional, Carlos Falistocco, presentará los resultados de la evaluación de la disponibilidad de los tratamientos antirretrovirales en la región de las Américas. En este sentido desde el GCTH se realizó un estudio sobre la compra y precios de medicamentos en cada país, para ponerla a disposición como una herramienta útil a la hora de negociar a nivel individual o regional.

Además se presentarán los resultados de un estudio interno que tuvo como finalidad desarrollar un plan de cooperación Sur-Sur y los resultados del plan de comunicación estratégica, que incluye el relanzamiento del sitio web del grupo, entre otras herramientas.

EL Grupo de Cooperación Técnico Horizontal (GCTH), presidido por Argentina desde 2012, es una iniciativa de los países de LatAm creada en 1995 con el objetivo de mejorar la respuesta al VIH-sida y otras Infecciones de Transmisión Sexual por medio de acciones articuladas entre los Programas Nacionales de Sida de los países y las redes comunitarias existentes en la región.


Fuente: MIrada Profesional

Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Biosimilars: 10 Drugs to Watch


The world’s largest two markets for prescription medicines remain a study in contrasts: The European Medicines Agency authorizes 11 biosimilar drugs for market in the nations comprising the EU. Meanwhile in the U.S., the FDA continues to ponder draft guidances for how the agency will evaluate biosimilars.

Those guidances, released last year, left numerous questions unanswered: How similar should the near-copies be to their innovator drugs? How should drugmakers demonstrate the safety of their products? How should interchangeability of biosimilars to innovator products be determined? How should biosimilars be named and labeled? Biopharma companies are closely watching what FDA does since patents for 12 blockbuster biologic compounds generating a combined $67 billion in sales will expire by 2020, according to the Generics and 

Biosimilars Initiative. Biopharma companies don’t want to be left behind as the biosimilar segment grows—from $172 million in 2010 to an estimated $3.927 billion by 2017, according to Frost & Sullivan.

EMA defines biosimilars as “similar to a biological medicine that has already been authorized, the so-called reference medicinal product.” FDA has proposed using slightly stricter wording, declaring that, in order to be considered a biosimilar, the biological product must be “highly similar to the reference product notwithstanding minor differences in clinically inactive components.” By minor differences, the agency states that there should be no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of the safety, purity, and potency of the product.

As reported in this space last year, “EMA’s development of solid guidelines almost a decade ago followed by specific rules for different drug classes helps explain why Europe is much further along than the U.S. in bringing biosimilars to market.” Little has changed since then.

Drugs are listed by original brand name (generic name), followed by a list of drug developers with a brief summary of the status of their biosimilar, and its name where known; the nature of the drug and its indication; its 2012 sales (and the original drug’s maker or makers); and the drug’s patent status in the U.S. and EU.

Aranesp (darbepoetin alfa)
Drug developers:
  • Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories: Cresp® launched 2010 in India as that country’s only darbopoetin alfa of any kind, and as world’s first generic darbopoetin alfa.
  • Merck: MK-2578 development halted in 2010
  • Stada: Silapo® marketed in EU, where it was authorized December 2007 for anemia that is causing symptoms in patients with chronic renal failure; anemia in adults receiving chemotherapy to treat certain types of cancer and to reduce the need for blood transfusions; and to increase the amount of blood patients with moderate anemia can self-donate before surgery.

Nature and indication: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) for anemia due to chronic kidney disease (CKD) in patients on dialysis and patients not on dialysis; the effects of concomitant myelosuppressive chemotherapy, and upon initiation, there is a minimum of two additional months of planned chemotherapy.
2012 sales: $2.040 billion (Amgen)
Patent status: Patent set to expire 2016 in EU; 2024 in U.S.


Enbrel (etanercept)
Drug developers:
  • Avesthagen: Avent™ in preclinical studies as of 2012
  • BioXpress Therapeutics: Biosimilar in active development
  • Cipla: Launches biosimilar in India on April 17, at a price of Rs. 6,150 ($113.43), 30% less than the innovator product.
  • Hanwha Chemical: HD203 “scheduled for launch,” company states on its website without including a date, following submission for marketing approval to South Korea’s Korea Ministry of Food and Drug Safety following completion of Phase I and Phase III trials. Hanwha has said it will seek a partner to commercialize HD203 and a biosimilar for Herceptin (trastuzumab).
  • LG Life Sciences: LBEC0101 completed Phase I trial in South Korea
  • Mycenax Biotech: TuNEX in Phase III clinical trials in Japan and South Korea
  • Protalix Biotherapeutics: PRX-106 in preclinical studies
  • Shanghai CP Goujian Pharmaceutical: Etanar®, marketed in Colombia; Yisaipu, marketed in China

Recently discontinued effort: Merck & Co. and Hanwha Chemical: Hanwha disclosed December 18, 2012, that Merck terminated agreement to develop and manufacture the biosimilar MK-8953, now called HD203, as well as market it in all countries except South Korea and Turkey, an up to $720 million deal signed June 2011.1
Nature and indication: Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blocker for rheumatoid arthritis, polyarticular Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) in patients aged two years or older; psoriatic arthritis; ankylosing spondylitis; and plaque psoriasis
2012 sales: $7.963 billion (includes $4.236 billion Amgen + $3.737 billion Pfizer). Amgen markets Enbrel in U.S. and Canada under an agreement with Pfizer set to expire October 31, 2013
Patent status: Patents set to expire in EU in 2015; in U.S., 2019, 2023, 2028, and 2029.


Epogen® / Procrit® / Eprex / Erypo (epoetin alfa)
Drug developers:
  • Hexal: Epoetin alfa Hexal marketed in EU, where it was authorized August 2007 for anemia, cancer and chronic kidney failure
  • Hospira: Retacrit® marketed in EU, where it was authorized in December 2007 for anemia associated with chronic renal failure or other kidney problems, adults receiving chemotherapy for some cancers. Also indicated to increase the amount of blood patients with moderate anemia can self-donate before surgery, and to reduce the need for blood transfusions in patients with moderate anemia about to undergo major bone surgery. In U.S., Phase III trial launched last year. 
  • Medice: Abseamed® marketed in EU, where it was authorized August 2007 for anemia, cancer, and chronic kidney failure
  • Sandoz: Binocrit® marketed in EU, where it was authorized August 2007 for anemia and chronic kidney. In U.S., the company said October 25, 2012, that it has started patient enrolment in a Phase III clinical trial, comparing safety and efficacy of biosimilar with reference product Epogen® /Procrit® in anemia associated with chronic kidney disease.

Nature and indication: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agent for anemia due to chronic kidney disease in patients on dialysis and not on dialysis; due to Zidovudine in HIV-infected patients; and due to effects of concomitant myelosuppressive chemotherapy, where upon initiation, there is a minimum of two additional months of planned chemotherapy. Also, for reduction of allogeneic RBC transfusions in patients undergoing elective, noncardiac, nonvascular surgery
2012 sales: $2.267 billion, including $1.941 billion for Epogen (Amgen), and $326 million combined for Procrit / Eprex / Erypo (Johnson & Johnson) Amgen also generated
Patent status: Patent set to expire 2015 in U.S.; expired 2004 in EU.


Genotropin (Somatropin or somatotropin)
Drug developers:
  • BioPartners: Valtropin® marketed in EU, where it was authorized April 2006, 12 days after Omnitrope, for pituitary dwarfism and Turner syndrome; authorization withdrawn voluntarily “for commercial reasons” in October 2011, and withdrawn formally in May 2012.
  • Sandoz: Omnitrope® marketed in EU, where it was authorized April 2006 for pituitary dwarfism, Prader-Willi syndrome, and Turner syndrome; the first biosimilar authorized by the European Medicines Agency. In U.K., was the first biosimilar recommended for approval by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in 2010. In Japan, launched October 2009 as that nation’s first approved biosimilar

Nature and indication: Peptide human growth hormone for children with growth failure due to growth hormone deficiency (GHD), Prader-Willi syndrome, small for gestational age, Turner syndrome, and idiopathic short stature; and for adults with either adult onset or childhood onset GHD. Pursuing FDA approval since 2009 for additional indication, Replacement of human growth hormone deficiency (Mark VII multidose disposable device); received two complete response letters. “We are working to address the FDA's requests for additional information,” Pfizer stated in its 2012 Financial Report.
2012 sales: $832 million (Pfizer)
Patent status: Patents expired 2008 and April 16, 2013 in U.S.


Herceptin (trastuzumab)
Drug developers:
  • Amgen, Synthon, and Watson (now Actavis): Global licensing agreement announced July 18, 2012, for clinical development and testing of biosimilar. Deal followed publication March 2, 2012, of Phase I trial results showing bioequivalence between Synthon’s biosimilar and Herceptin
  • BioXpress: Biosimilar in active development
  • Hanwha Chemical: Biosimilar in development. Hanwha has said it is seeking a partner to commercialize Herceptin and HD203, a biosimilar for Enbrel
  • Hospira: Biosimilar in active development.
  • Pfizer: PF-05280014 completed Phase I REFLECTIONS B327-01 trial as of December 2012, to study the safety and pharmacokinetics of the biosimilar compared to Herceptin. The study yielded “positive data,” hence the company “is exploring plans to go into Phase III this year, Mikael Dolsten, president of Pfizer’s Worldwide Research & Development unit, said on the Q4 2012 earnings conference call January 29.
  • PlantForm: Clinical trials in humans expected to begin in 2014. Biosimilar expected to be launched, “in partnership with a pharmaceutical company,” in world markets in 2016
  • Stada Arzneimittel: Joined with Gedeon Richter in announcing plans August 2011 to collaborate on biosimilars for trastuzumab and rituximab. Richter agreed to buy from Stada trastuzumab for a “low single-digit million Euros figure,” they announce.

Nature and indication: Monoclonal antibody; Human epidural receptor 2 (neu) receptor antagonist for aggressive HER positive metastatic and adjuvant breast cancer, for aggressive HER positive metastatic stomach or gastroesophageal junction cancer.
2012 sales: $6.317 billion (CHF 5.889 billion) (Roche)2
Patent status: Patents set to expire July 2014 in Europe, and June 2019 in the U.S.


Humira (Adalimumab)
Drug developers:
  • AET BioTech and BioXpress: Biosimilar being co-developed under agreement announced October 25, 2012; companies will be jointly responsible for development, registration, and manufacture of the biosimilar, based on BioXpress technology. AET BioTech will provide further investment in the biosimilar based on committed long-term financing, and oversee any future commercialization of the product.
  • Amgen: Biosimilar in active development
  • Boehringer Ingelheim: BI695501 completed Phase I trial in New Zealand, studying the biosimilar’s safety and pharmacokinetics compared to Humira (adalimumab) in October 2012.
  • Fujifilm and Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Companies announce 50–50 joint venture, Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics, to develop a biosimilar version of Adalimumab for rheumatoid arthritis. The venture is proceeding with preparations to begin clinical trials in Europe in the first half of 2013, the companies said October 24, 2012.

Nature and indication: Anti-TNF-α monoclonal antibody for moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis, moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis, moderate to severe Crohn’s disease; moderate to severe ulcerative colitis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, moderate to severe polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis
2012 sales: $9.265 billion (AbbVie)3
Patent status: Patent set to expire 2016 in U.S.; 2018 in EU.


Neulasta (pegfilgrastim)
Drug developers:
  • Hospira: Biosimilar in development.
  • Merck & Co.: MK-6302 said to be in clinical development as of 2011 for neutropenia caused by cancer chemotherapy; no further announcement since then on ‘6302, acquired through acquisition of Insmed in 2009
  • Teva: Neugranin launch delayed in 2011, when company reached settlement of litigation with Amgen in which it agreed not to sell Neugranin until November 10, 2013 unless it first obtains a final court decision that Amgen patents are not infringed by the biosimilar.
  • Teva: Lipefilgrastin (XM22) meets primary endpoint in Phase III clinical trial of reducing the duration of severe neutropenia, in a study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lipegfilgrastim compared to pegfilgrastim, the company said June 6, 2011.

Nature and indication: Leukocyte growth factor indicated to decrease the incidence of infection, as manifested by febrile neutropenia, in patients with nonmyeloid malignancies receiving myelosuppressive anticancer drugs associated with a clinically significant incidence of febrile neutropenia
2012 sales: $4.092 billion
Patent status: Patents set to expire August 2015 in EU; October 2015 in U.S.


Neupogen (filgrastim)
Drug developers:
  • Biocon and Celgene: Nufil marketed in India by Biocon; in active development for EU by joint venture
  • ctArzneimittel: Biograstim® marketed in EU, where it was authorized September 2008 for cancer, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and neutropenia
  • Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories: Grafeel marketed in India
  • Hexal: Filgrastim Hexal® marketed in EU, where it was authorized February 2009 for cancer, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and neutropenia
  • Hospira: Nivestim™ marketed in EU, where it was authorized June 2010 for cancer, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and neutropenia
  • Intas/Apotex: Neukine in Phase III development
  • Merck & Co.: MK-4214 in Phase III clinical development; acquired through acquisition of Insmed in 2009
  • Ratiopharm: Ratiograstim® marketed in EU, where it was authorized September 2009 for cancer, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and neutropenia. Authorization withdrawn voluntarily March 2011, followed two months later by formal European Commission withdrawal.
  • Sandoz: Zarzio® marketed in EU, where it was authorized February 2009 for cancer, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and neutropenia In U.S., recruiting patients as of January for a noninterventional, long-term safety data collection of the biosimilar and Filgrastim Hexal® in stem cell donors (NCT01766934)
  • Teva: Tevagrastim® marketed in EU, where it was authorized September 2008 for cancer, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and neutropenia

Nature and indication: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for neutropenia caused by the drugs used to treat cancer
2012 sales: $1.260 billion (Amgen)
Patent status: Patent set to expire December 2013 in U.S.; Patent expired 2006 in EU.


Remicade (infliximab)
Drug developers:
  • Amgen: Biosimilar in active development
  • BioXpress: Biosimilar in active development
  • Celltrion: Ramsima™ (formerly CT-P13) authorized for marketing in Korea on July 20, 2012, for rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative colitis, Crohn’s disease, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriasis. Applied for marketing authorization in EU
  • Hospira: Biosimilar in active development.

Nature and indication: Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blocker for moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis in adults, in combination with methotrexate; Crohn's disease in children six years and older, and adults who have not responded well to other medicines; rheumatoid arthritis; ankylosing spondylitis; psoriatic arthritis; chronic, severe, extensive, and/or disabling plaque psoriasis in adults; moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis in children six years and older and adults that have not responded well to other medicines.
2012 sales: $8.215 billion ($6.139 billion Johnson & Johnson + $2.076 billion Merck & Co.)
Patent status: Patents set to expire 2014 in Europe, and 2018 in U.S.


Rituxan / MabThera (rituximab)
Drug developers:
  • Amgen: Biosimilar in active development
  • BioXpress: Biosimilar in active development
  • Boehringer Ingelheim: BI695500 in Phase III development in U.S., EU, Brazil, Guatemala, Russia, Norway, Ukraine, Argentina, Peru, New Zealand. U.S. study recruiting participants as of April 17, according to ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01682512)
  • Celltrion and Hospira: Conducting Phase I trial in South Korea of CT-P10 for RA and another Phase I trial for lymphoma.
  • Dr. Reddy’s Laboratory: Reditux® marketed in Bolivia, Chile, India, and Peru
  • iBio: Announces October 5, 2011, that it produces rituximab in nontransgenic green plants. More recent announcements, however, focus on the company’s technologies for developing biosimilar and proprietary drugs. On April 26, 2012, announces results of ongoing tests showing that its immunomodulator molecule lichenase (LicKM) enhances vaccine antigens when produced as fusions to LicKM. iBio said it will offer commercial collaborations and product licenses to the immunomodulator, dubbed iBioModulator™, which last month was awarded U.S. Patent No. 8,404,252. The iBioModulator has been shown in animal models to increase the strength and extend the duration of immune response to a vaccine antigen.
  • Merck: MK8808 in Phase I development for EU, with trial in Belarus
  • Pfizer: PF-05280586 set this year to complete a Phase II trial launched March 2012 comparing the biosimilar to Rituxan/MabThera. “This year, we expect data,” Mikael Dolsten, president of Pfizer’s Worldwide Research & Development unit, said on the Q4 2012 earnings conference call January 29.
  • Probiomed: Kikuzubam® marketed in Bolivia, Chile, Mexico, and Peru
  • Roche: CEO Severin Schwan was quoted in March as pushing back his company’s anticipated launch of a rituximab biosimilar beyond the 2016 date he had earlier cited in The Wall Street Journal, until the end of this decade.
  • Sandoz: GP2013 in Phase I/II trial for rheumatoid arthritis and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and a Phase III trial for advanced folicular lymphoma. As of last year, the biosimilar was in Phase II trials in Argentina, Austria, Brazil, France, Germany, India, Italy, Spain, and Turkey.
  • Stada Arzneimittel: Joined with Gedeon Richter in announcing plans August 2011 to collaborate on biosimilars for rituximab and trastuzumab. Stada receives nonexclusive rights to sell Richter-produced rituximab in Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States, excluding Russia. In addition to an undisclosed payment to Richter, Stada also agrees to pay Richter based on progress of the development of rituximab to a “low double-digit million Euros”

Recently discontinued efforts:
  • Teva and Lonza: End planned 544-patient, Phase III clinical trial of TLO11, saying they wanted input from regulators on designing the trial program (October 2012). On April 5, Lonza issues statement denying news reports that it will end its biosimilar joint venture with Teva4
  • Samsung Biologics: Venture between Samsung and Quintiles halts development of SAIT101, in October 2012, reportedly due to uncertainty over biosimilar regulation in the U.S.

Nature and indication: Chimeric mouse-human monoclonal antibody, for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and rheumatoid arthritis
2012 sales: $7.190 billion (CHF 6.707 billion) (Roche)5
Patent status: Patents set to expire later this year in EU, and 2018 in U.S.


Among other drugs for which biosimilar efforts have been announced in recent months:
  • Avastin (Bevacizumab): Amgen is developing a biosimilar to the breast cancer drug, while Fujifilm and Kyowa Hakko Kirin on October 24, 2012, announce 50–50 joint venture, Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics, to develop a biosimilar version of Avastin (Roche / Genentech) for cancer indications
  • Lispro: Biocon and Mylan announed a strategic collaboration February 14 to develop a biosimilar to the generic version of insulin analog Humalog (Eli Lilly)
  • Glargine: Biocon and Mylan on February 14 announced a strategic collaboration to develop a biosimilar to the insulin analog Lantus (Sanofi)
Notes:
1 Merck has said it remains committed to developing biosimilars, citing its February 20 announcement with Samsung Bioepis of an agreement to “develop and commercialize multiple pre-specified and undisclosed biosimilar candidates.”
2 Sales figures converted to USD via XE (www.xe.com) on April 18, 2013
3 Company spun out January 2, 2013, from Abbott Laboratories, whose portfolio included Humira during 2012. AbbVie has promised to fight off biosimilar challengers through a vigorous defense of what it says are some 200 patents covering Humira.
4 Those news reports follow an interview of Lonza CEO Richard Ridinger by the Swiss newspaper Finanz und Wirtschaft, in which he says that “a joint venture team is reassessing at the moment whether our assumptions from 2009 are still correct” and questions whether the joint venture with Teva will continue to exist.
5 Sales figures converted to USD via XE (www.xe.com) on April 18, 2013. Q4 figures not reported for each drug by Roche, but derived by subtracting January-September sales, which are reported by the company in its third-quarter results, from full-year sales.


Fuente: GEN



Haciendo click en el link de abajo, accederás a los Contenidos del

Programa Ejecutivo en PENSAMIENTO ESTRATÉGICO

http://msg-latam-meic.blogspot.com.ar/2014/03/programa-ejecutivo-en-pensamiento.html

INICIA Lunes 21 de Abril de 2014 en UTN, Universidad Tecnológica Nacional

Consultar por opción IN COMPANY a: msg.latam@gmail.com

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Pharma & Biotech Trends - Compromise on Drug Data: T-R-A-N-S-P-A-R-E-N-C-Y is necessary

by John Sterling

In a recent trip to a European biotech conference I brought along a copy of Scientific American that was published last December. Among the articles that caught my eye was one entitled “Is Drug Research Trustworthy,” written by one Charles Seife. It provided the most recent look at an ongoing issue impacting the life sciences, i.e., the need for scientists to disclose who is funding their work.

Why? Because it’s in everyone’s interest to highlight any potential conflict of interest. For if pharma firms are spending big bucks supporting the research of independent scientists who, as the Sciam article noted, “are doing work that bears, directly or indirectly, on the drugs these firms are making and marketing,” and the scientists do not disclose this financial support, how are we to be truly comfortable with anything these researchers publish in a scientific journal? And what are we to make of a company’s product claims as a result of these alliances?

The Sciam article contained two very telling sentences:

“Researchers think that what these companies are after are their brains, but they’re really after their brand", says Marcia Angell, former editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine. "To buy a distinguished, senior academic researcher, the kind of person who speaks at meetings, who writes textbooks, who writes journal articles—that’s worth 100,000 salespeople".

I am not going so far as to say let’s ban all such financial support, but I do believe it makes a heck of a lot of sense to let everyone know what’s on the table. One step in the right direction was taken by the NIH several years ago. That institution mandates that NIH grantees disclose all financial agreements over $5,000 to their home organizations. But even here, according to Sciam, neither at the NIH nor at other scientific institutions are there regular “watchdogs” on the lookout for conflict-of-interest violations. So, it seems to me that transparency on who is doing what with whom and who is paying whom for what is the way to go.

And just when I got back from the European conference a story by Katie Thomas appeared in the NY Times: “Breaking the Seal on Drug Research.” Here again the topic of transparency was in the forefront, but this time the focus of the article was on strongly “encouraging” pharma companies to make public the data garnered in clinical trials for their products. The impetus behind these actions can be found in the severe side effects that were reported after some patients began taking Vioxx (heart attacks) and Paxil (increased risk of suicide among teenagers). Drug reform activists say that if more clinical trial information had been released earlier a number of these drug-related problems might have been spotted and serious adverse events avoided.

Sometimes the punishment for not reporting clinical trial safety data at all or doing so improperly can be harsh. In 2012, Glaxo paid $3 billion in fines after the U.S. Justice Department cited the firm for not reporting safety data on its Avandia diabetes drug (side effect was an elevated heart attack risk) and for publishing incomplete information on the previously mentioned Paxil.

The European Medicines Agency recently reported that next year it will make clinical trial data public whenever the organization approves a new drug. Roche and Glaxo are behind the EMEA on this. But the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America trade group and other drug companies are not on board with this decision. They cite fear over the release of intellectual property information and other commercially protected data.

With people’s lives and well-being at stake, and with billions of pharmaceutical company dollars invested in drug research, there has to be room for some type of compromise, i.e., all involved parties need to come together to figure out a system where clinical trial data can be released earlier than usual with appropriate safeguards developed to protect valuable company information related to drug R&D and commercialization efforts. And, I contend, every effort should be made that as much transparency as possible be built into such systems.

    Fuente: GEN

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

Hippocrates, the Essences of Euripides, and their Impact on Clinical Efectiveness
Medical humanities education illuminates the human condition, creates more effective clinicians
by Steve Goldstein
In the film 50/50, based on a true story, a 27-year-old writer is blindsided by a cancer diagnosis and struggles with the disease, as well as the bewilderment of his friends and family. James L. Scott, M.D., former dean of The George Washington University’s School of Medicine and Health Sciences (SMHS) and a professor in the Department of Emergency Medicine, teaches this movie in a film and medicine course. “It portrays living with cancer in a way we don’t normally think about, with a young man dealing with it through black humor, with friends making fun of it, living with it in ways that wouldn’t occur to most people,” says Scott.

And it fits in with the goals of humanities education at SMHS, which is aimed at using the arts to deepen the understanding of the human condition. Or, to put it another way, adding the essence of Euripides to the ethos of Hippocrates.

Vice President for Health Affairs and Dean of SMHS Jeffrey S. Akman, M.D. ’81, G.M.E. ’85, an avid supporter of the program begun by Scott in 2005, and himself a former English major at Duke University, says: “I think the arts and humanities give us particular insights into the human condition that are relevant to being a physician. I want to support my students, residents, and faculty so that they think about people in a complex way, and arts help us to do that. I think that’s what drives people to medicine — the notion of humanity”.

GW holds a unique and prominent place in medical humanities education in the United States. Although a majority of medical schools offer some courses in medical humanities, only a relatively small percentage offer as robust a program as SMHS, according to Therese Jones, Ph.D., interim director of the Center for Bioethics and Humanities at the University of Colorado, Denver. And the emphasis at GW is growing.

“Medical humanities” is typically defined as an interdisciplinary field of humanities (literature, philosophy, ethics, history, and religion), social science (anthropology, cultural studies, psychology, sociology), and the arts (literature, theater, film, and visual arts) and their application to medical education and practice. Apart from providing insight into the human condition, studying literature and the arts helps to develop and nurture skills of observation, analysis, empathy, and self-reflection — skills that are essential for humane medical care.

Linda Raphael, director of the medical humanities track curriculum at SMHS, emphasizes the interdisciplinary nature of the program. “When any discipline sees itself as separate from all other things, it tends to suffer,” she says. “Medical education is very vigorous and demanding. The humanities offer an opportunity for students to think and talk about what they’re doing in a different language and through different perceptions. It takes them a little back into the world they’ve come from".

At GW, medical humanities electives are offered in the first, second, and fourth years. In the third year, Raphael leads one to three sessions in all of the clerkships — psychiatry has three, for example. So even if a student chooses not to take any electives, he or she will attend humanities sessions in the clerkship year. “By the fourth year, the number of students exposed to classes in medical humanities is at least one-third of the 170 students in each class,” she says. There are also those who choose the humanities track for all four years, although this cohort is small.

Raphael, who teaches a course on graphic literature involving medicine called “Commix,” recalls a neurology track student who was particularly moved after viewing a film meant to stimulate discussion about the distinction between sympathy and empathy. “She said it meant a lot to her to have an opportunity to talk about these things,” Raphael says.

Another innovation at SMHS is a Theater in Medicine program, developed by Charles Samenow, M.D., assistant professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and director for medical student education, and GW visiting professor Jeffrey Allen Steiger, who directed a theater program at the University of Michigan. A team of actors, some of whom have a background in health care, use common issues such as personal relationships, stress, and competitiveness among practitioners to highlight theories of professionalism.

Psychiatrist and philanthropist Assad Meymandi, who received his M.D. from GW in 1962, has been a vocal supporter of humanities education at his alma mater. “The most important thing for me is to bridge the gap between basic sciences and the humanities and the arts,” he says. “I see so many humanists who don’t know anything about science and so many scientists who know nothing about the humanities. I want to bring the two bodies together.” Meymandi says he’d love to add a course to the humanities curriculum about “what it means to be a human.”One performance called Milestones”, is a dynamic, interactive multimedia production focused on professionalism, burnout, and disruptive behaviors. Samenow believes that information delivered through the medium of theater — “a safe learning environment” — resonates with students and faculty, and makes lessons on communications, conflict resolution, and teamwork more vivid and, often, longer lasting. Feedback from students and professionals has been very positive.

Humanities education at GW is not restricted to medical students. Christopher Bayne, a urology resident, is chair of the Arnold P. Gold Humanism Honor Society chapter (see page 32). “The Gold Foundation and others like it are trying to bring the human element back into what is almost algorithmic care”, he explains. “Medicine used to be a very personal interaction; now it’s not”.

Akman spends significant time speaking to alumni and potential donors about supporting the humanities education program. He is proud of the humanities history at the school, which he says actually began with popular professor Frank N. Miller, B.S. ’43, M.D. ’48, GW professor emeritus of Pathology, who originated a Medicine in Literature course way back in 1967.

Akman himself teaches a course with Raphael. A theater buff, he was momentarily overwhelmed with ideas when asked what play he would teach. “Angels in America by Tony Kushner”, he reasons. “It deals with HIV/AIDS, and he builds an epic play around a medical illness.

“If I could have medical students see one play, that would be it”.