SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Ligand (LGND) Breakout! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tommysdad who wrote (10427)10/30/1997 4:39:00 PM
From: Henry Niman  Respond to of 32384
 
The Droloxifene NDA was also mentioned in the PRNewswire version also:

Thursday October 30 11:17 AM EST

Company Press Release

Pfizer Expects to Launch Three New Drugs in 1998,
Company Tells Wall Street

NEW YORK, Oct. 30 /PRNewswire/ -- With new product launches, anticipated regulatory filings
for additional products, and the introduction this year of two major new drugs with three more
anticipated for 1998, Pfizer could set an industry record for productivity, William C. Steere, Jr.,
Pfizer Inc (NYSE:PFE) chairman and chief executive officer, said today.

''In only a few years we could be actively promoting 17 products in the United States,'' Mr. Steere
said at a meeting for financial analysts, the press and guests held at the company's headquarters.
''Such an effort far surpasses anything that we -- or anyone else in the industry -- have ever
attempted.''

This year Pfizer, with its partners, introduced two new products: Aricept, for the treatment of
mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease, and Lipitor, for the treatment of elevated blood cholesterol
and triglycerides in patients with high cholesterol. Aricept was discovered and developed by Eisai
Co., Ltd., and Lipitor was discovered and developed by the Parke-Davis research division of
Warner-Lambert Company. Pfizer has co-marketing and co-promotion agreements with those
companies for most key markets around the world.

In-line products performed strongly. Norvasc, for the treatment of hypertension and angina
discovered by Pfizer, became the top-selling cardiovascular medicine in the world. Zithromax, the
Pfizer azalide antibiotic, became the most-prescribed and fastest-growing branded oral antibiotic in
the U.S. Aricept, launched in February, quickly expanded the market for treatment for Alzheimer's
disease. The launch of Lipitor is considered by many to be the most successful pharmaceutical
product launch in history. Pfizer reported that it was on or ahead of schedule in filing three New
Drug Applications (NDAs) with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration this year. Furthermore, the
company said that its R&D pipeline holds some 57 potential new drugs in various stages of
development.

Mr. Steere attributed the company's success to its focus on health care, innovation, and commitment
to productivity and effectiveness in an era marked by changing market forces, regulatory pressures
and new technologies. ''We concentrate on what we do best -- discovering, developing, and
bringing to market, cures and therapies that will help patients around the world lead healthier, more
productive lives,'' he said.

Providing an overview of the company's R&D pipeline, John F. Niblack, Ph.D., Pfizer Inc executive
vice president and the company's lead scientist, described several series of products in varying
stages of development. The new products, he emphasized, represented significant medical advances
with possibilities for value-adding supplemental uses and dosage forms. Included in the first wave
are three drugs now undergoing regulatory review: Trovan, a broad-spectrum antibiotic; Zeldox, to
treat symptoms of schizophrenia; and Viagra, an oral treatment for male erectile dysfunction. Dr.
Niblack also said that the company this year had filed nine applications for new uses for currently
marketed Pfizer products and had received approval for seven new indications for Zoloft,
Zithromax, and Unasyn.

Noting that the company's current product line still has patent protection well into the next century,
Dr. Niblack said, ''The new wave will give Pfizer the potential for continued strong growth in
revenues well into the 2000's.''

George M. Milne, Jr., Ph.D., president, Pfizer Central Research, said the company's development
rate of 15 to 18 new drug candidates each year over the past three years was a company record.
Pfizer now has 150 discovery projects in more than 17 therapeutic areas, he said.

To continue to enhance that drug discovery record, Dr. Milne said, Pfizer is currently adding more
than a million square feet of laboratory space with construction of new facilities at each of the
company's research sites in Groton, Connecticut; Sandwich, England; and Nagoya, Japan.
Additionally, Pfizer continues to expand its internal programs through a network of partnerships with
biotech companies and academic institutions, Dr. Milne said.

Dr. Milne highlighted the clinical development programs for several new drugs in key therapeutic
areas, including cardiac disease; diseases of the central nervous system; infectious disease; cancer;
and metabolic diseases such as osteoporosis and diabetes. Among the late stage candidates he
profiled are:

Dofetilide, in phase III, is a major advance in the treatment of the widespread cardiac
arrhythmia condition, atrial fibrillation (AF). The first anti-arrythmic drug to specifically target
AF, dofetilide has an unprecedented safety profile. Recently released findings from a global
study of dofetilide in 3,000 patients (called the ''DIAMOND'' study), showed this drug to
reduce hospitalization for congestive heart failure and to be very well tolerated. Pfizer plans to
file for regulatory approval of dofetilide in the U.S. and Europe in the first quarter of 1998.
Eletriptan, now in phase III, could emerge as a leading oral treatment for migraine. One
head-to-head trial with sumatriptan, the leading approved therapy, showed oral eletriptan to
be twice as effective as sumatriptan within one hour of administration. Eletriptan has mild
reported side effects. U.S. and European regulatory filings are expected for third quarter,
1998.
Droloxifene, an estrogen agonist/antagonist, is in phase III development for treatment of
breast cancer; Pfizer plans to file an NDA in the fourth quarter of 1998. Phase II trials for
osteoporosis and lipid lowering are underway
.

Dr. Milne also outlined the company's approach to diabetes treatment, which builds on the
company's in-line products, Glucotrol and Glucotrol XL. Pfizer is developing a unique system for
delivery of insulin by inhalation that will enter phase III development next year. To treat diabetic
complications, the company's aldose-reductase inhibitor, Alond, is in phase III development now,
Dr. Milne said.

''This is a time of extraordinary opportunity for Pfizer,'' said Dr. Milne, ''and the most prolific
period in drug discovery in our history, brought about by revolutionary technological advances in
biotechnology and genetic research that have markedly increased the number of therapeutic targets
available for research.''

Summarizing the key drivers of the company's continued strong performance, David L. Shedlarz,
Pfizer senior vice president and chief financial officer, cited the balancing of growth in earnings today
and investments for the future, and strong product performances, with increasing demand for Pfizer's
new products. Co-promotion partnerships with the Warner-Lambert Company and Eisai Co. Ltd.
further enhanced Pfizer's product line.

''In 1997, we are accelerating investment in our sales and marketing organization, fully funding R&D
at more than $1.9 billion, absorbing significantly adverse foreign exchange, and targeting growth of
at least 10 percent in revenue, net income, and earnings per share for the full year,'' Mr. Shedlarz
said.

''In Pfizer's third-quarter earnings release,'' he continued, ''we stated that we were comfortable with
the range of the majority of analysts' earnings-per-share estimates at that time of $1.65 to $1.70 for
the year. We are currently comfortable with the upper end of this earnings-per-share range for
1997. Of course, such forward-looking statements should be evaluated with due consideration given
the many uncertainties inherent in our business, particularly those mentioned in the applicable
cautionary statements in Part 1 of our 1996 10-K.''

Pfizer Inc is a research-based healthcare company with global operations. In 1996, the company
reported sales of more than $11 billion and anticipates investing more than $1.9 billion on research
and development in 1997.

SOURCE Pfizer Inc



To: tommysdad who wrote (10427)10/30/1997 4:44:00 PM
From: Henry Niman  Respond to of 32384
 
Here's an earlier story on estrogen and Alzheimer's (it also notes the larger estrogen levels in male brains which correlates with a lower incidence of Alzheimer's in males):

.c The Associated Press

By PAUL RECER

AP Science Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Treatment with estrogen dramatically improved the memory
and concentration of elderly women with Alzheimer's disease, researchers
reported Wednesday.

Experts called the findings encouraging but said they need to be verified in
larger trials.

The experiment, conducted at the Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care
System in Tacoma, Wash., is the first controlled study among Alzheimer's
patients to evaluate the effects of estrogen on the mind-destroying disease.
Earlier, noncontrolled studies suggested that the hormone can protect against
developing Alzheimer's.

''Women on estrogen had a significantly improved ability to remember
things,'' said Dr. Sanjay Asthana, lead author of the new study. Results were
presented Wednesday at the national meeting of the Society for Neuroscience.

Asthana said the study involved 12 women in their 70s, all with clinically
diagnosed mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease.

All of the women received drug-delivery skin patches, six with estrogen, the
others with a placebo preparation. The identity of the women getting estrogen
was not disclosed to treating physicians.

''The effect of the estrogen was rapid,'' said Asthana. ''Within a week,
there was improvement.''

Throughout the eight-week trial, the women received standard neurological and
psychological tests to detect changes.

Asthana said the women on estrogen had memory test scores 2-2 1/2 times
greater than their scores before taking the drug. Attention test scores
''almost doubled,'' he said.

Loss of memory and attention span are two of the cognitive functions most
severely affected by Alzheimer's, a disease that affects about 4 million
Americans. It progressively destroys the mind, eventually killing the victim.
There is no proven cause or cure.

Asthana said in his study, the estrogen effect was dose-related -- that is,
patients who absorbed more of the hormone from the patches improved the most.
The memory and attention improvements gradually faded, he said, after the
experiment ended.

A number of studies have shown that estrogen tends to slow the onset of
Alzheimer's symptoms, including three that concluded the hormone reduces the
risk of the disease by up to 40 percent in post-menopausal women.

Researchers from Washington University in St. Louis reported preliminary
results last year suggesting that estrogen pills improved the memory of 10
women with Alzheimer's disease.

Asthana said that his study was too small to be conclusive but gives strong
support for larger, more extensive tests among Alzheimer's patients.

Dr. Bruce McEwen, a brain researcher at Rockefeller University in New York,
was encouraged by Asthana's study. Combined with others, he said, it shows a
''consistent pattern'' suggesting that estrogen can have a strong influence
on the disease.

''This research is very encouraging,'' said Zavern Khachaturian of the
Alzheimer's Association and the Ronald and Nancy Reagan Research Institute.
But he cautioned: ''We cannot yet draw any conclusions from so small a
sample. These results must be confirmed in a larger group.''

Estrogen is known primarily as a female hormone, and researchers have learned
it has many functions. In women of childbearing age, estrogen protects
against heart disease and bone loss.

In the brain, estrogen appears to increase the action of CREB, a gene that
plays a critical role in memory, a function so important it apparently occurs
in both men and women. Testosterone, a male hormone, is converted to estrogen
for use in the male brain. The production of testosterone throughout men's
lives may account for the fact that Alzheimer's is much less common among men
than among women, whose estrogen levels drop after menopause.

Estrogen replacement therapy became used most widely to protect
post-menopausal women from osteoporosis, the brittle-bone disease. The
therapy since has been found to improve the mental performance of normal,
healthy older women, to protect against heart attack and to lower the risks
of some types of cancer.

However, estrogen replacement is not risk-free. Studies have shown that the
therapy can slightly increase the risk of breast cancer and of developing
blood clots.

AP-NY-11-20-96 1516EST



To: tommysdad who wrote (10427)10/30/1997 4:47:00 PM
From: Henry Niman  Respond to of 32384
 
Here's and earlier WSJ report on various SERMs (and LGND now has deals with PFE, AHP, and LLY):

8/2/95 Drug May Offer Alternative To Estrogen-Replacement Therapy

By Elyse Tanouye Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal In
their search for safer alternatives to estrogen-replacement
therapy, scientists have discovered intriguing new uses for an
old class of compounds: anti-estrogens. Initial tests suggest
that these experimental drugs may prevent -- in one pill -- four
of the most devastating diseases of older women: osteoporosis,
heart disease, breast cancer and, in some cases, uterine cancer.
"It's potentially very exciting," says Gregory Mundy, professor
of medicine at the University of Texas' health-science center in
San Antonio. Anti-estrogens, he says, "do all the good things
estrogen does without some of the problems." The potential
benefits of anti-estrogens lie in the fact that they mimic
estrogen in some organs, such as the liver and bones, while
blocking estrogen's cancer-promoting effects in other tissues,
such as the breast and uterus. Having shown promise in test
tubes and animals, anti-estrogens must still undergo extensive
testing in humans. But if they work as expected, they could
obviate the decision-making older women now face: whether to
take estrogen after menopause to protect their bones and heart,
as many doctors urge them to do, or to avoid the hormone because
it may also raise their risk of breast and uterine cancer.
Seeing a huge market potential for anti-estrogens,
pharmaceutical companies are racing to get their versions
through clinical trials. Eli Lilly & Co. appears in the lead
with its drug, raloxifene, which is in late-stage human testing
against osteoporosis. Pfizer Inc., SmithKline Beecham PLC,
Zeneca Group PLC, American Home Products Corp., and Ligand
Pharmaceuticals Inc. are also working on anti-estrogens.
Anti-estrogens got their name because scientists were initially
only aware of the drugs' ability to block estrogen's
cancer-promoting role in breast tissue. The anti-estrogen
tamoxifen, sold by Zeneca under the brand name Nolvadex, has
been used as a breast-cancer therapy in the U.S. since 1978 and
is currently being tested to see whether it can prevent breast
cancer. Some anti-estrogens were developed as alternatives to
tamoxifen but for various reasons sat around on drug-company
shelves for years. In the mid-1980s, scientists working
separately in the U.S. and in France made some important
breakthroughs in the understanding of how and where estrogen
works in the body by identifying the estrogen receptor inside
certain cells. Around the same time, medical researchers
observed that women taking tamoxifen lost less bone mass and had
lower cholesterol than women who weren't on the drug. They had
expected the opposite effect because anti-estrogens block
estrogen, which protects the bones and heart. Moreover, in the
uterus, scientists observed that tamoxifen also sometimes acts
like estrogen by stimulating cancer cells. Belying its name, the
anti-estrogen was acting like estrogen in some places. Over the
next few years, scientists learned that estrogen and
anti-estrogens compete with each other to attach to the estrogen
receptors that are found throughout the body. The estrogen
receptor changes its shape after estrogen or an anti-estrogen
binds to it, taking on one shape with estrogen, and other shapes
with the different anti-estrogens, according to Donald P.
McDonnell, associate professor of pharmacology at Duke
University Medical Center. The receptor's shape determines
which genes it can turn on. The activated genes produce proteins
that go on to regulate different processes in the body, such as
bone remodeling or cancer cell growth. When estrogen binds to
the receptor, it activates about 100 genes, says Robert B.
Stein, chief scientific officer of Ligand. Anti-estrogens
activate just some of those genes, he says, and the task of drug
researchers has been to find the compounds that activate the
beneficial genes. Estrogen can't bind to a receptor already
occupied by an anti-estrogen and can't start the complex
processes leading to cancer-cell growth, according to Peter
Kushner, assistant research biochemist at the University of
California, San Francisco. Researchers at Lilly began to take
note of the anti-estrogen developments in the mid-1980s and
developed a number of compounds, including raloxifene. The
company first tested the compounds against breast cancer but
shelved the testing to put resources in other projects, says
John D. Termine, head of Lilly's bone-research program. But a
handful of Lilly scientists continued to work with the drug.
When Dr. Termine came to Lilly from the National Institutes of
Health to set up the company's bone-research program in 1991,
the researchers urged him to take a look at the work they had
done on raloxifene. Impressed with what he saw, he immediately
began testing the drug against osteoporosis. "My boss said,
'This thing could be a high-tech hormone-replacement therapy,'"
he recalls. In early human clinical trials, raloxifene appeared
to be as effective as estrogen in reducing bone loss and
lowering cholesterol. The drug also appears to protect against,
rather than cause, uterine cancer, Dr. Termine says. The drug is
currently a year into a four-year clinical trial, but if interim
data after the second year are strong enough, Lilly may seek
marketing approval early, he says. Pfizer is working with two
anti-estrogen compounds, one licensed from a European company,
Klinge Pharma GmbH and the other from a research collaboration
with Ligand. The Klinge compound, droloxifene, is very similar
to tamoxifen, but without any apparent link to uterine cancer,
says Allen Kraska, Pfizer group director of clinical research.
The drug is in late-stage testing against breast cancer and in
preliminary human tests for osteoporosis. As scientists explore
anti-estrogens' potential benefits, they are wary about possible
side effects. Tamoxifen causes hot flashes and other menopausal
symptoms in some patients. And some tamoxifen patients have
complained about depression, Dr. Kushner says. Estrogen
receptors appear active in a wide range of tissues. For example,
estrogen appears to protect against Alzheimer's disease and to
reduce colon-cancer risk, according to researchers. The effects
of an anti-estrogen in those areas probably won't be fully
understood until years after the drug is on the market. "This
particular field is in its infancy," says Conrad Johnston,
professor of medicine at Indiana University School of Medicine.
"That you can design an estrogen-like compound that will work in
one place as an estrogen and as an antagonist someplace else is
new and exciting, and I think will lead to better drugs."

Anti-Estrogens in Development

COMPANY DRUG STATUS

Eli Lilly Raloxifene Late-stage testing (Phase
III) against osteoporosis

Pfizer Droloxifene Phase III testing against
breast cancer; intermediate stage testing
(Phase II) against osteoporosis


Unnamed Preclinical testing compound
from Ligand against osteoporosis Zeneca
Tamoxifen National Cancer Institute testing to prevent
breast cancer ICI182780
Preclinical development against breast cancer

SmithKline Idoxifene Phase II testing against
breast cancer; preclinical testing against
osteoporosis

American

Home Unnamed Exploratory

& Ligand compounds



To: tommysdad who wrote (10427)10/30/1997 4:50:00 PM
From: Henry Niman  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 32384
 
Here's a nice review of ERT:
America's No. 1 drug is an elixir of youth, but women must decide if it's
worth the risk of cancer

BY CLAUDIA WALLIS

On Feb. 13, 1963, a new patient strode into the office of New York City
gynecologist Robert A. Wilson. To Wilson, she was nothing less than a
revelation or, to be more precise, a walking, talking confirmation of his
most deeply held medical convictions. Wilson was a leading proponent of
treating menopausal women with the female hormone estrogen. He was convinced
that, given early enough and continued throughout life, hormone treatment
could actually prevent what he called the "staggering catastrophe" of
menopause and the "fast and painful aging process" that attended it.

Wilson's new patient, "Mrs. P.G.," as he later called her, said she was 52
years old, but her body told another story. "Her breasts were supple and
firm, her carriage erect; she had good general muscle tone, no dryness of the
mucous membranes and no visible genital atrophy. Above all," Wilson noted,
"her skin was smooth and pliant as a girl's." When asked about menopause, she
laughed and replied, "I assure you, Dr. Wilson, I have never yet missed a
period. I'm so regular, astronomers could use me for timing the moon."

Pressed for her secret, the youthful matron eventually revealed she had been
taking birth-control pills, containing estrogen and a second female hormone,
progesterone. That was the very formula Wilson had developed as a means not
only to treat menopausal complaints but also to forestall the aging process.
Mrs. P.G. was a lush exemplar of his notion that "menopause is unnecessary.
It can be prevented entirely."

Three years later, in a hugely successful book, Feminine Forever, Wilson
announced the good news to all womankind. "For the first time in history," he
wrote, "women may share the promise of tomorrow as biological equals of men
... Thanks to hormone therapy, they may look forward to prolonged well-being
and extended youth."

Estrogen is indeed the closest thing in modern medicine to an elixir of
youth--a drug that slows the ravages of time for women. It is already the No.
1 prescription drug in America, and it is about to hit its demographic sweet
spot: the millions of baby boomers now experiencing their first hot flashes.
What Wilson didn't appreciate, but what today's women should know, is that,
like every other magic potion, this one has a dark side. To gain the full
benefits of estrogen, a woman must take it not only at menopause but also for
decades afterward. It means a lifetime of drug taking and possible side
effects that include an increased risk of several forms of cancer. That
danger was underscored last week by a report in the New England Journal of
Medicine reaffirming the long-suspected link between estrogen-replacement
therapy and breast cancer. Weighing such risks against the truly marvelous
benefits of estrogen may be the most difficult health decision a woman can
make. And there's no avoiding it.

As research reveals the pros and cons of estrogen, the therapy's popularity
has flowed and ebbed like some sort of national hormonal cycle. Wilson's book
did wonders for the sale of Premarin (a form of estrogen made from--and named
for--a pregnant mare's urine). But estrogen use plummeted after 1975, when
studies revealed that women taking the hormone had up to a 14-fold increased
risk of uterine cancer. Reports of a 30% increased risk of breast cancer
scared away many others.

Today estrogen in its various forms--pills, patches and creams--is flowing as
never before. Cancer risks have been diminished, doctors believe, by lowering
the dosages used in hormone-replacement therapy (HRT). The risk of uterine
cancer, in particular, can be virtually eliminated, experts say, by adding
synthetic progesterone (progestin) to the estrogen prescription, either
combined in one capsule or as a separate pill. Meanwhile a raft of studies
showing new and unexpected benefits has propelled medical enthusiasm for the
treatment to huge, if not quite Wilsonian, proportions. Estrogen, it seems,
can prevent or slow many of the ravages of aging, including:

Menopausal miseries.

The oldest and most familiar use of HRT is to relieve the hot flashes, night
sweats, vaginal dryness and other symptoms of estrogen "withdrawal" that
occur around menopause, when the ovaries produce less and less estrogen.

Heart disease.

Several studies, including the famous Nurses Health Study that followed
120,000 nurses for more than 10 years, have found that postmenopausal women
on estrogen have about half the incidence of heart disease of those who don't
take hormones. HRT seems to improve a woman's ratio of good cholesterol (HDL)
to bad cholesterol (LDL) and also maintains the pliability of the blood
vessels, lessening the risk of blockage.

Osteoporosis.

Estrogen is the most effective means of preventing the thinning of bones that
makes older women so vulnerable to fractures. Studies have shown that it cuts
the risk of hip fractures up to 50% if treatment begins at menopause. And new
evidence suggests that it could help prevent devastating fractures even when
treatment begins at 70 or older.

Mental deterioration.

Several small trials have indicated that estrogen improves memory for
postmenopausal women. And a tantalizing study, reported in 1993, found that
HRT enhanced the mental function of women with mild to moderate symptoms of
Alzheimer's disease.

Colon cancer.

A large study released in April found that estrogen users had a 29% lower
risk of dying from colon cancer than nonusers. For those on estrogen more
than 10 years, the risk was 55% lower.

Aging skin.

HRT seems to help preserve skin elasticity, much as Wilson boasted. It helps
maintain the collagen that keeps skin looking plumped up and moist.

Given all this, it's no wonder doctors are handing out estrogen prescriptions
with almost gleeful enthusiasm. According to researchers at the Food and Drug
Administration, estrogen prescriptions in the U.S. more than doubled between
1982 and 1992. About a quarter of U.S. women at or past menopause--roughly 10
million--take the hormone, making estrogen a billion-dollar business. As baby
boomers approach menopause, those numbers will skyrocket.

While gynecologists acknowledge that there are risks to estrogen therapy,
they tend to emphasize the pluses. "The benefits of HRT will outweigh the
risks for most women," says Dr. William Andrews, former president of the
American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. "Eight times as many women die
of heart attacks as die of breast cancer."

Still, the specter of cancer continues to haunt HRT. With last week's New
England Journal report, hope faded that progestin would offer estrogen users
protection against breast cancer, as it does against uterine cancer. In fact,
it appears that the combined hormones may put women at a higher risk for
breast cancer than estrogen alone. This bad news came in the wake of an
alarming report in May suggesting that long-term use of estrogen heightens
the risk of fatal ovarian cancer.

Even before these disturbing reports appeared, American women were distinctly
less exuberant about estrogen than their doctors. A 1987 survey showed that
20% of women given a prescription for estrogen never even fill it. Of those
who do begin taking the hormone, a third stop within nine months, and more
than half quit within one year. Many others go on and off HRT. Some do it
because they don't feel quite right on the medication, some because they hate
taking drugs, many because they worry about cancer. "I feel like a guinea
pig," complains a 52-year-old woman attending a women's discussion group in
Minnesota. "In 10 years we'll all be saying 'We should have been on
hormones!' or 'Damn it, why did we take those things?'"

For many women there is something fundamentally disturbing about turning a
natural event like menopause into a disease that demands decades of
medication. And there's something spooky about continuing to have monthly
bleeding at age 60, a fairly common consequence of some types of hormone
therapy. "Why fight vainly to remain in a stage of life you can't be in
anymore, instead of enjoying the stage you are in?" asks Dr. Nada Stotland,
51, an HRT dropout. Stotland, a psychiatrist at the University of Chicago,
says she is "extra skeptical, because there are powerful forces that aim one
toward prescribed hormones, but there is no profit motive in not prescribing
something."

Breast-cancer specialist Dr. Susan Love shares her skepticism: "Many
gynecologists are handing out these hormones like M&M's," she says. No matter
how beneficial estrogen may seem, no drug treatment comes without drawbacks.
In biology as in business, notes the Los Angeles oncologist, "there's no free
lunch."

THE POWER HORMONE

To understand the risks and wonders of estrogen therapy, it helps to know
something about the hormone's natural role in the body. Estrogen is powerful
stuff. Receptors for the hormone are found in some 300 different tissues,
from brain to bone to liver. This means that in one way or another, all these
tissues respond to the presence of estrogen. Some, including tissues in the
urinogenital tract, the blood vessels, the skin and the breasts, require
estrogen to maintain their tone and flexibility.

Estrogen levels begin to rise in girls as early as age 8 in response to a
symphony of signals that stir sexual development. The hypothalamus, in the
brain, acts as the maestro, spurring the pituitary to release hormones, which
in turn prompt the ovaries to churn out estrogen. By age 11 or 12, production
of estrogen and other hormones by the ovaries is sufficient to trigger the
development of the breasts, growth of underarm and pubic hair, and the
beginning of menstruation. But because these hormones influence so many
tissues, they incite all sorts of adolescent mayhem: oilier hair and
blemished skin, lurching moodiness, a growing interest in sex, and sometimes
severe menstrual cramps.

In many ways, menopause is a mirror image of this process. Just as estrogen
rises gradually in childhood, so it begins to wane some 25 years later,
starting in the early 30s. The effects of the decline are rarely
noticeable--except in decreasing fertility--until the early 40s, when women
enter the transitional period known as perimenopause. Menstruation becomes
less regular, the skin becomes dryer, hair turns more brittle and sparser
under the arms and between the legs. Some women feel a loss of libido, and
many suffer fluctuations in mood analogous to those that afflict adolescents.

IS IT HOT IN HERE?

As estrogen levels drop during perimenopause, the hypothalamus sends out more
and more hormonal signals in a desperate attempt to get the ovaries to make
more estrogen. But the aging eggs in ovaries respond erratically, explains
endocrinologist Lila Nachtigall of New York University. As a result,
"estrogen levels can fluctuate from low to high, day by day, and that can
drive you crazy."

Since the hypothalamus is also the body's thermostat, its overactivity
triggers the famous hot flashes of menopause, described by one sufferer as "a
blowtorch aimed right at your face." According to current theory, this may be
caused by the hypothalamus' release of an adrenaline-like substance that revs
up the metabolism. The same mechanism may cause heart palpitations and
nighttime sweating so intense that it can soak through the sheets.

About 85% of women experience some symptoms around menopause, lasting up to
five years. At a round-table discussion sponsored by the pharmaceutical
company Ciba-Geigy, a group of eight women described their tribulations with
an extraordinary mix of candor, desperation and humor. (The women, most of
whom do not take estrogen, agreed to be identified by their first names
only.)

Sonia, 48, has "terrible" headaches and wakes up in the middle of the night
with hot flashes: "I have to keep a cold washcloth on my night table; I put
it on the back of my neck." Marguerite, 43, said she is so irritable before
her period that she has taken to warning her officemates, "Next week's the
week." For Susan, 48, "vaginal dryness is the worst," and beginning at 41,
she was bothered by the unpredictability of her menstrual cycle: "My period
would last 10 days, 12 days, 14 days. Then it would be six weeks, three
weeks, two weeks."

More alarming is the gushing bleeding some of the women have experienced, the
result, in many cases, of missed hormonal signals and a loss of uterine
muscle tone. "Sometimes when I'm at the office and I stand up, the blood is
dripping down my leg," said Marian, 45. "What the hell is going on? Am I
hemorrhaging?" And a few women complained about bladder-control problems.
Joked Marian: "Don't tell me I'm going to replace tampons with Depends!"

Not every woman will feel the symptoms so intensely. Heavy women tend to have
an advantage at menopause, since fat cells manufacture a form of estrogen
called estrone. Some lucky women, regardless of weight, simply churn out more
estrone once estrogen from the ovaries shuts off.

Personal circumstances may matter as much as chemistry. The decline in
estrogen often coincides with many life changes. "Your children grow up and
move away. You don't look as gorgeous as you used to, and your husband leaves
you for a younger woman. These things may leave you vulnerable to
depression," says Dr. Stotland of the University of Chicago. "The more a
woman feels valued in her life, the less likely she is to have emotional
symptoms at menopause. Working women tend to do better than women who stay
home."

Women are often shocked when menopausal symptoms strike in the early 40s. The
average age of menopause, after all, is 51. Most know little about
perimenopause, and their doctors aren't much help. A Gallup poll of women
ages 45 to 60 conducted last year found that only 44% were satisfied with the
information they received from their doctors about menopause. Until recently,
doctors "simply weren't aware of perimenopause," admits endocrinologist
Howard Zacur of Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore. "Changes in the cycle at
this time of life were misinterpreted and misdiagnosed."

Even now, the odd bleeding patterns of perimenopause are often attributed to
fibroid tumors (which may or may not be a factor). Because their symptoms
have been poorly understood, many women have undergone unnecessary
hysterectomies and D&Cs (dilatation and curettage), a procedure that scrapes
away the uterine lining. Roughly 1 out of 4 U.S. women is thrown into
"surgical menopause" by the removal of her uterus and ovaries instead of
hitting menopause naturally.

HERE, HAVE SOME HORMONES

The best therapy for perimenopause is "knowing what it is," says Harvard
gynecologist Alan Altman. Exercise, a proper diet and not smoking can also
help. (Women who smoke reach menopause an average of two years earlier than
nonsmokers.) For 85% of women, the symptoms will stop within one year of
their final period. But for those who are in too much misery to wait it out,
estrogen can do wonders.

Patricia Thomas, 56, of Baltimore suffered nearly five years with hot
flashes, night sweats and sleeplessness. Estrogen completely halted her
symptoms and made her feel "wonderful." Barbara Williams, 47, of Chicago was
so irritable, she says, that "my family would hate to see me coming home from
work." An estrogen patch (plus progesterone pills) evened out her moods. HRT
can sometimes alleviate vaguer woes--the generalized achiness that some women
feel and a sense of mental fogging. There is a "euphoric effect or general
improvement in mental state," says Cleveland endocrinologist Wulf Utian,
co-founder of the North American Menopause Society.

But Utian is quick to point out that not every woman should take estrogen. It
is not advisable for those with a history or a high risk of breast or uterine
cancer. Nor is it recommended for women with clotting problems.

Besides, some women feel lousy on hormones. And many are distressed to find
they gain weight (though it's unclear that estrogen is really to blame). When
Lynn Schleeter, 44, of New Brighton, Minnesota, was taking estrogen and
progesterone, "I was so lethargic, I couldn't walk around the block." She
feels more energetic now that she has thrown away her estrogen patch and
switched to a regimen of exercise, vitamins and calcium supplements (to fight
osteoporosis).

Progesterone pills can be particularly hard to tolerate. Progestin is always
prescribed along with estrogen for women with an intact uterus. While
estrogen prompts the uterine lining to thicken, progestin signals it to stop
growing and slough off; this artificial menstrual cycle seems to prevent
endometrial cancer. But progestin often causes cramps, irritability and other
PMS-like problems. In her 1991 book on menopause, The Silent Passage, Gail
Sheehy tells how estrogen highs and progestin lows made her feel as though
her body was "at war with itself for half of every month."

ESTROGEN FOREVER?

Once the storms of perimenopause have cleared, many women see little reason
to remain on estrogen. Some enter a period of well-being, famously dubbed
"post-menopausal zest" by anthropologist Margaret Mead. In her latest book,
New Passages, Sheehy calls this the "pits to peak phenomenon": Women emerge
from the morass of menopause with "a greater sense of well-being than any
other stage of their lives."

Yet, no matter how marvelous such women may feel, the prevailing medical view
is that most should stay on estrogen for the long haul. Unnatural as that
sounds, doctors argue that life after menopause is itself somewhat unnatural.
"As women have lived increasingly longer lives, they are facing problems
their grandmothers never faced," says Dr. Charles Hammond, chairman of
obstetrics and gynecology at Duke University Medical Center. "At the turn of
the century, women died soon after their ovaries quit." Now they live to face
heart disease, osteoporosis, increased fractures--problems that may be
prevented in part by taking estrogen.

Unfortunately, estrogen works its preventive wonders only if taken for many
years--the longer, the better. To prevent osteoporosis, for instance, a woman
must use estrogen continuously for at least seven years, according to recent
data from the Framingham study in Boston. Currently, 95% of women on HRT take
it for three years or less--"not long enough to get any positive effects on
their bones," says Dr. John Gallagher, an endocrinologist at Creighton
University in Omaha, Nebraska.

Similarly, researchers studying estrogen and heart disease see the greatest
benefits in long-term use. Estrogen helps keep levels of LDL cholesterol low
and HDL cholesterol high, which is one reason pre-menopausal women have a
much lower rate of heart disease than their male peers. Without HRT, a
woman's risk of a heart attack rises to match that of men within 15 years of
menopause. Estrogen also acts directly on blood vessels, causing them to
dilate slightly so that blood flow improves, says Dr. Roger Blumenthal of
Johns Hopkins Hospital. But these benefits disappear as soon as the patient
stops taking hormones.

Given all this, it seems logical to recommend HRT for postmenopausal women
with high cholesterol levels or other warning signs of heart disease. Indeed,
Blumenthal considers HRT "a first-line therapy" for such women. Likewise, it
is now standard practice to give estrogen to women with a high risk of
osteoporosis--approximately 1 in 3 U.S. women. Gallagher recommends routine
bone-density tests to assess bone condition and at least 10 years of
estrogen, beginning at menopause, for those with fragile bones.

While such recommendations are based on the best available research, experts,
if pressed, will admit that the research is woefully inadequate. Most of the
controlled studies on estrogen therapy have been short-term and can shed no
light on long-term risks. "I think the currently available data are
extrapolated to excess with respect to heart disease," complains cardiologist
David Herrington of Bowman Gray School of Medicine in Winston-Salem, North
Carolina.

What does emerge from the longer-term data is that prolonged use of estrogen
appears to increase the risk of breast cancer and other malignancies. And the
longer estrogen is taken, the greater the risks. For instance, a study of
240,000 women sponsored by the American Cancer Society found that those who
took estrogen for at least six years had a 40% increased risk of fatal
ovarian cancer. For those taking estrogen for 11 or more years, the increase
jumped to 70%.

There may be other risks and other advantages of HRT, but what doctors know
is limited by the type of research that has been done. Instead of setting up
a group of women on HRT and a carefully matched control group that does not
take hormones, studies like the Nurses trial simply look at populations of
women who made their own choice whether to take estrogen. "The problem with
this," explains Dr. Susan Love, "is that women who take hormones go to
doctors more, eat well, exercise and are in better health generally than
women who don't take hormones." Thus it is hard to tell whether their lower
rates of heart disease or colon cancer or fractures reflect HRT or these
other healthy habits.

The good news is that a well-designed, long-term study of HRT is finally
under way. Last year, in an attempt to redress a historic shortfall in
research on women's health, the National Institutes of Health launched the
$628 million Women's Health Initiative. In the HRT portion of the study,
which will involve 27,500 women, half will be randomly assigned to HRT, half
to a placebo. Researchers will follow the women for at least eight years and
compare rates of heart disease, osteoporosis, breast cancer and other
ailments. When the results are reported, doctors and patients may finally
have some clear picture of the risks and benefits of long-term HRT. Alas,
that won't be until 2005.

In the meantime, women are faced with a tough choice. Dr. Isaac Schiff, chief
of obstetrics and gynecology at Massachusetts General Hospital, puts it with
refreshing bluntness: "Basically, you're presenting women with the
possibility of increasing the risk of getting breast cancer at age 60 in
order to prevent a heart attack at age 70 and a hip fracture at age 80. How
can you make that decision for a patient?"

Those who don't like that choice may want to examine the alternatives. There
are other ways to fight osteoporosis and heart disease: don't smoke; get
regular exercise that is both weight bearing (to prevent bone loss) and
aerobic (to condition the cardiovascular system); eat a diet rich in calcium
and low in fat. And, of course, there are other drugs for heart disease and
several promising new ones in the pipeline for osteoporosis.

Many of the "alternative" practitioners around the country are suggesting
that women seek estrogen from dietary sources. In Los Angeles and Boston,
Mexican yams have become all the rage among women of a certain age. Yams
contain a weak form of estrogen. San Francisco nutritionist Linda Ojeda,
author of Menopause Without Medicine, advocates soybeans, which contain a
natural progesterone as well as estrogen. The low rate of menopausal
complaints among Japanese women may be due in part to their consumption of
tofu, she suggests. To relieve hot flashes, Ojeda recommends 6 oz. of tofu
four times a week, 800 units of vitamin E daily, plus a few other herbs and
vitamins. "Why not start with the least invasive products first? If you have
a cold, you start with chicken soup and garlic."

In the final analysis, the decision about estrogen is a highly individual
one. It should depend on a woman's assessment of her own health; her family
history of cancer, heart disease and osteoporosis; and even on personal
philosophy. "I have a hunch that I'll remain on HRT for the rest of my life,"
says Frida, a Chicago-area college instructor in her early 70s, who feels
that estrogen gives her "more energy" and a more youthful appearance. But for
Joan Israel, 64, a clinical social worker in Franklin, Michigan, fear of
cancer was a deciding factor against estrogen. "So what if you get wrinkles
or a little flabby, as long as you are basically healthy?"

As is so often the case in modern medicine, the most a patient can ask of her
doctor is to lay out the risks, the benefits and the honest fact that the
data are inadequate, and then let her make the choice.

Reported by Wendy Cole/Chicago, Alice Park/New York and Martha Smilgis/Los
Angeles



To: tommysdad who wrote (10427)10/30/1997 4:52:00 PM
From: Henry Niman  Respond to of 32384
 
Here's another potential application:
.c The Associated Press

By LINDSEY TANNER

CHICAGO (AP) - Middle-aged women seeking a fountain of youth may find it in a
bottle. A new study suggests estrogen supplements can help prevent wrinkles
and skin dryness.

Researchers studying 3,875 post-menopausal women found that those who used
estrogen had significantly fewer wrinkles and dryness.

The findings appear in the March issue of Archives of Dermatology, published
by the American Medical Association.

Specialists not associated with the study called it flawed, in part because
it relied on women's memories of whether they had used estrogen in the past.

But the study supports previous evidence that estrogen - a growth-promoting
hormone - improves skin appearance and suppleness by building up levels of
collagen, a fibrous protein in connective tissue beneath the skin.

Dr. Gail Greendale, a UCLA internist and senior author of the study, said it
is the first to use dermatological exams to compare the skin condition of
post-menopausal estrogen users and non-users.

Most women who take estrogen do so to help prevent hot flashes, sweats and
other symptoms associated with menopause. Research also has shown it can
reduce the risks of heart disease and osteoporosis in older women.

Drawbacks include an increased risk of uterine cancer, and some studies have
found an increased risk of breast cancer.

Greendale said estrogen's skin-improving qualities are simply one more factor
women should consider when weighing whether to use estrogen.

Participants in her study were post-menopausal women nationwide ages 40 to
74. They were asked whether they had ever used post-menopausal estrogen; how
long they used estrogen and how much were not studied.

Researchers took into account sun exposure, age and socioeconomic status,
though participants were not asked whether they had ever had facelifts or
other youth-enhancing skin treatments.

''Women who used estrogen were approximately 25 to 30 percent less likely to
have dry skin and wrinkling than women who did not use estrogen,'' Greendale
said.

Dr. Wulf Utian, chairman of reproductive biology at Case Western Reserve
University in Cleveland and director of the North American Menopause Society,
criticized the study for relying on visual exams rather than biopsies to
assess skin.

University of Chicago dermatologist David Pezen, another outside specialist,
also faulted the authors for relying on participants' memories of estrogen
use.

''I would not recommend that women go on estrogen just to reduce wrinkles,''
Pezen said. He said he would recommend other ways to avoid wrinkles, such as
shunning sunbathing.

AP-NY-03-18-97 1734EST



To: tommysdad who wrote (10427)10/30/1997 4:54:00 PM
From: Henry Niman  Respond to of 32384
 
Here's more on baldness:

Baldness may be linked to female hormone

RALEIGH, N.C. - Researchers using mice to examine a pesticide's effects on skin cancer also
developed data they say indicates baldness may be linked to the presence of a female hormone, not the absence of a male one.

Dr. Robert Smart and graduate assistant Hye-Sun Oh were studying the pesticide's impact when
they found that the shaved skin of mice grew hair when treated with an estrogen blocker.

"Estrogen was playing some fundamental role in skin biology," Smart said.

The discovery by the North Carolina State University researchers was published in the Tuesday,
Oct. 29, 1996, edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The discovery is being tested for possible application in humans, but any commercial use could be
five years away, Smart said.

Smart said the studies also provided insights into skin cancer, but an scientist who wasn't involved in the research said it was too soon to suggest the data may lead to cures for either condition.

"It may well be that whatever effect estrogen has is going to be much more significant in the mouse than the human," said Dr. Barbara Gilchrest, chairwoman of the dermatology department at Boston University.

Another researcher said the finding is a good start for understanding hair loss conditions.

"What's interesting and frustrating about the hair follicle is it requires the interaction of a lot of signals.
This is such a clear demonstration of an agent that it's new and it's exciting," said Dr. Ulrike Lichti, hair follicle investigator at the National Cancer Institute.

Smart said the estrogen blocker acts as a switch to turn on hair growth in the lab mice. He said
research to determine if the same switch exists in humans is underway at Wake Forest University's
Bowman-Gray School of Medicine.

Scientists have known that cells at the base of the hair follicle, called dermal papilla cells, regulate the follicle growth and resting periods. But no one knew why. Smart said his research points to a
reason.

"In the follicle itself, what we're observing is one particular cell type is being influenced by estrogen and it is influencing the growth of another cell type," Smart said.

Past research into hair growth has focused on male hormones, or androgens.

"People believed that androgens were very important in regulating hair growth," Smart said. "In
beard and whisker growth, that's important, but when one talks about hair growth on top of our
head, it doesn't necessarily hold. Androgens do play a role, but for all the research that has been
done the outcome is not as successful as we would like."



To: tommysdad who wrote (10427)10/30/1997 4:55:00 PM
From: Henry Niman  Respond to of 32384
 
Here's the PNAS abstract on baldness:

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Volume 93, Number 22; Pages: 12525-12530
Medical Sciences

An estrogen receptor pathway regulates the telogen-anagen hair follicle
transition and influences epidermal cell proliferation

Hye-Sun Oh, Robert C. Smart

1996 by the National Academy of Sciences

ABSTRACT The hair follicle is a cyclic, self renewing epidermal structure which is thought to be controlled by signals from the dermal papilla, a specialized cluster of mesenchymal cells within the dermis. Topical treatments with 17-beta-estradiol to the clipped dorsal skin of mice arrested hair follicles in telogen and produced a profound and prolonged inhibition of hair growth while treatment with the biologically inactive stereoisomer, 17-alpha-estradiol, did not inhibit hair growth. Topical treatments with ICI 182,780, a pure estrogen receptor antagonist, caused the hair follicles to exit telogen and enter anagen, thereby initiating hair growth. Immunohistochemical staining for the estrogen receptor in skin revealed intense and specific staining of the nuclei of the cells of the dermal papilla. The expression of the estrogen receptor in the dermal papilla was hair cycle-dependent with the highest levels of expression associated with the telogen follicle. 17-beta-Estradiol-treated epidermis demonstrated a similar number of 5-bromo-2'-deoxyuridine (BrdUrd) S-phase cells as the control epidermis above telogen follicles; however, the number of BrdUrd S-phase basal cells in the control epidermis varied according to the phase of the cycle of the underlying hair follicles and ranged from 2.6% above telogen follicles to 7.0% above early anagen follicles. These findings indicate an estrogen receptor pathway within the dermal papilla regulates the telogen-anagen follicle transition and suggest that diffusible factors associated with the anagen follicle influence cell proliferation in the epidermis.



To: tommysdad who wrote (10427)10/31/1997 7:17:00 AM
From: Henry Niman  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 32384
 
Here's another earlier study suggesting an estrogen indication for Alzheimer's:
Aug. 16, 1996

Estrogen may lower woman's risk of
Alzheimer's

Taking estrogen appears to dramatically reduce a woman's risk of
Alzheimer's disease, the strongest research on the subject so far shows.

"This is the first really good epidemiologic evidence that this treatment
may delay the onset of symptoms for a significant number of years,"
says Zaven Khachaturian of the Alzheimer Association's Ronald and
Nancy Reagan Research Institute. About 4 million Americans have
Alzheimer's.

The study in Friday's Lancet by Richard Mayeux and Gertrude
Sergievsky of Columbia University found that taking estrogen for 10
years after menopause reduced the risk of Alzheimer's by 30% to 40%.

Researchers studied 1,124 women age 70 and up. Of 968 women who
did not take estrogen, 158 developed Alzheimer's. Of 156 who took
estrogen, only nine developed it.

Estrogen users who developed Alzheimer's had symptoms later than
expected.

Experts believe that estrogen aids in the repair and maintenance of
brain cells.

But Neil Buckholtz of the National Institute on Aging says a large
randomized clinical trial will be needed to finally prove estrogen
prevents Alzheimer's.

Estrogen is recommended for relieving menopause symptoms. Studies
show it also reduces the risk of heart disease and slows osteoporosis,
though some studies have linked estrogen with increased risk of breast
cancer. Women should weigh the risks and benefits with their doctor.

By Tim Friend, USA TODAY