Vivus, Why the Slide? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Vivus, Why the Slide?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Edderd who wrote (1700)	5/22/1997 10:55:00 AM
From: Tunica Albuginea	of 3991

Edderd thanks for the info. Generally I shun all medical stcks because with the advent of managed care I believe cash flow will go out of rather than into the system. Also it is hard to know whether ther truly aren't any competing products. Vivus is an exception because vasodilatory drugs ( local or systemic ) are a special interest of mine and I am familiar with them. It has a patent which has already been upheld in England against a gel delivered trans urethrally, and it has the difficulty of entry which is that the drugs Vivus uses/will use have already passed the FDA hurdle for systemic use and it is easy to get approval for local use. I don't see Viagra making it because it is very difficult to pass muster with the Cardio- Renal subcommittee of the FDA that looks at all vasodilators.Thes folks are cardiologists /nephrologists etc/ internists and pharmacologists.; no urologists are in it as far as Iknow. They are much more sensitive to the issues of hypoperfusion of brain and heart by a vasodilator through an already obstructed asymptomatic vessel - aerea causing an ifarct of brain heart arrhythmia etc. Also they are sensitive to drug interactions;all the above are issues pertinent to tje sick geriatric populatioin that encompasses the impotence field.Did you read ( if you didn,t I suggest you do ) the original Viagra article in The British Jof Urology?: erections were too brief about 10 mins and that means you have to goto a higher dose which is were you start geting side effects and drug interactions Let me know what you think after you read it. Recantly you may have read about the big scare that calcium channel blocker vasodilators may be causing heart attacks and all the manufacturers sent letters out to all doctors reassuring them that thes data were preliminary only. I believe it was the cardology division of the NAT Ins of Health that had made that reccommend that Clcium blockers no longer be used for tretment of hypertesion in older people and those affected with coronary artery disease: the drugs are Cardizem , Isoptin , Adalat and of couse Pfizer's Procardia.However new evidence keeps coming in and now 1 year after the aforementioned events hospitals have pulled out Pfizer's Procardia sublingually as treatment for either acute hypertension and/or chest pain ( for which Procardia had been used in the past.) My hospitals ( several ) have switched to sub-lingual Capoten 12.5 mg instead. Let me know if your hospital also has that policy.After these new concerns about side effects from previously approved systemic vasodilators I think the FDA is going to look hard and long at any new ones icluding sildenefill. The original Brit. J. of Urol Istudy I mentioned had used 12.5 mg ( 3 min erection) 25mg ,8 min erection and 50 mg---> ~12.5 min erection on average " enough to have intercourse!!" ( must have been a qiuckie ). The AUA study with Tom Lue went up to 100 mg. i hear people want to go now to 200mg. I can alredy see the FDA raising eyebrows.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next