I don't have time to edit this, so excuse it but...
<<Hoping this is just an initial knee jerk reaction>>
Speaking about jerks, of course I'm not referring to anyone in particular.
Bhag, I am out of town now, and unable to access some information, but this stance of "I'm just trying to help" is a lot of BS. Your comments are not based on any facts and contrary to your statements, neither you nor Steve represent the opinions of the "investment community" You mentioned recently some information you got from Steve, who has said repeatedly he knows nothing about biotechs <<Admittedly I do not understand this industry>>and knows little about Agouron although this does not prevent either of you from expressing these uninformed opinions. Steve has said in the past he hasn't wanted to call the company as HE KNOWS that they won't tell him anything he doesn't already know. I'm glad Steve is going to take the first step of writing them a letter. And you know the shorts must love you. Lind did not mention AG3340 because the trials are underway. He was referring to milestones anticipated, and Phase II/III is underway and data is BLINDED, which is good. It is not an open label study. No one shares your opinion about AG3340.
<<studies presented here over the past several days have confirmed that while protease-inhibitor therapy has helped prolong the lives of many people with AIDS, it can bring on severe cholesterol disorders, insulin resistance and the growth of abdominal and upper-back fat pads. >>
Henry, so now you are trying to help us out even more by giving us weekly prescription data. We all know how much the weekly data fluctuates and how unreliable. Spare us. Although after ICAAC, the prescription data slowed for awhile thanks to the media's misleading portrayal of Deek's findings.
The fact remains that Dr. Kotler, considered THE expert in HIV Nutrition and Wasting, is not pointing the finger at protease inhibitors as many are. Read Kotler's report summarized at: healthcg.com and also read what Lind wrote: "Early reports that it is caused by HIV protease inhibitors may have been premature, as it is now being seen with patients taking HIV reverse transcriptase inhibitors alone. The mechanism of action remains a mystery and may be related to a metabolic change associated with successful therapy. Data are scant on the current therapy of the problem, but should evolve over the next year."
As far as Sustiva, I think this short post by Lmoss on AOL is great. It was in response to someone's question about Rescriptor:
<<< Was it like the Dupont Sustiva Study 005, i.e., open-label with patients who had to be switched to other drugs, or who dropped out because of adverse reactions or other reasons, (and were then) deleted from the patient population before calculating the percentage below detectable levels?>>>>
Read Lind's report again. To me, the take home message from Geneva, being parlayed by the press and some physicians, is "If you value convenience over health; if you believe that the majority of patients on HAART develop resistance; if you believe that physician's know the "real reasons" why patients are non-adherent; if you believe that drug companies would never misrepresent their data; if you believe everything you read in the press; then you've come to the right place. IMO, the masses are asses and it is not any different this time.
"that bad news merits headlines, good news is mostly boring."
Re: Abelson<<He stated the reports coming from Geneva "were rather downbeat on the protease inhibitor makers">>
"Treatment combinations that include medicines called protease inhibitors have dramatically changed AIDS therapy. The drugs have pulled some patients back from the brink of death while stopping many others from getting sick." This quote was not from Vancouver in 1996 but from Geneva in 1998.
There was a lot of positive news that came out of this meeting.
There is hope that patients won't have to be on drugs all their lives. There is very good evidence that the immune system does begin to restore or reconstitute an immune response not only to common antigens but to HIV as well, and it is not necessary to get viral load to zero, if the immune system function returns and is able to handle small viral loads. There are reports of patients who were treated early and aggressively with HAART (including potent protease inhibitors) who have stopped taking HAART and have not had their viral load rebound. There are controlled trials being planned where patients who were treated early with HAART and immunotherapy will be taken off drugs to test this. There are trials going on in chronically infected patients,
Autran in France gave HAART (including a protease inhibitor) to 303 patients in the late stages of AIDS, with average baseline CD4 of 51 cells, that rose to 194 with treatment after 18 months. She found that 80% of these patients could generate memory cells capable of recognizing HIV virus. Fauci says Autran's work is among the best showing that there is at least partial reconstitution of the immune system.
<<However, it appears that there is a "HAART chronic disease" window to walk through, and that it would be wise to be a player. Data, not Fauci, will call the shots.>>> Fauci has always been against Remune. What else is new??
He was against Remune before he saw any of this recent data. Does anyone know who discovered IL-2, was it Gallo or Fauci?
Ironic, isn't it, that while the medical treatment that patients receive here are the envy of those in developing countries, here the press and drug companies can't wait to tear them apart.
Do doctors really know why adherence is a problem? Not according to a survey presented at Geneva.
There was significant disagreement in patient and physician assessment's of what factors are important to adherence. 59% of physicians but only 16% of patients thought that the number of doses or pills was an important factor. One overlooked factor that bothers patients more than physicians were aware of was the difficulty in taking medicine at work or in public places, due to the lack of privacy; failure to ask for clarification of dosing, etc in the presence of others. In a different survey, the primary reasons for non-adherence in 79% of patients at a SF General Hospital were: forgot or asleep, etc.
The first thing that struck our man in Geneva was that "last year's treatment paradigm of `hit hard, hit early' is being replaced by `hit
hard, hit late." What bull..!!!! Even Gallo says that the Berlin patient gives support to treating patients early, with Haart. For a fascinating article, read about the Berlin patient at : Message 4962420
If patients take the drugs as prescribed, and IF they are prescribed correctly, if baseline viral loads are not too high, blah blah blah
<<At least some long-term users of protease inhibitors, key parts of the
drug cocktails that have proved so effective in arresting the disease,
appear vulnerable to heart problems, fat redistribution and other
serious side effects. Which could enhance the appeal of
"protease sparing" cocktails. ><<studies presented here over the past several days have confirmed that while protease-inhibitor therapy has helped prolong the lives of many people with AIDS, it can bring on severe cholesterol disorders, insulin resistance and the growth of abdominal and upper-back fat pads. >>
The fact remains that Dr. Kotler, considered THE expert in HIV Nutrition and Wasting, is not pointing the finger at protease inhibitors as many are. Read Kotler's report summarized at: healthcg.com and also read what Lind wrote: "Early reports that it is caused by HIV protease inhibitors may have been premature, as it is now being seen with patients taking HIV reverse transcriptase inhibitors alone. The mechanism of action remains a mystery and may be related to a metabolic change associated with successful therapy. Data are scant on the current therapy of the problem, but should evolve over the next year."
If patients take the drugs as prescribed, and IF they are prescribed correctly, if baseline viral loads are not too high, blah blah blah
|
