Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bad Pharma

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bad Pharma

    October 28, 2009

    Weight Gain Associated With Antipsychotic Drugs

    By DUFF WILSON

    Children and adolescents who take the newest generation of antipsychotic medications risk rapid weight gain and metabolic changes that could lead to diabetes, hypertension and other illnesses, according the biggest study yet of first-time users of the drugs.

    The study, to be published Wednesday in The Journal of the American Medical Association found that 255 children and adolescents in New York City and Long Island added 8 to 15 percent to their weight after taking the pills for less than 12 weeks.

    The patients, ages 4 to 19, added an average of one to one-and-a-half pounds a week.

    “The degree of weight gain is alarming,” said Dr. Wayne K. Goodman, head of a Food and Drug Administration advisory panel on the drugs last summer and chairman of psychiatry at Mount Sinai School of Medicine. He was not involved in the study. “The magnitude is stunning,” he said. Although the drugs’ influence on weight and metabolism had been previously detected, Dr. Goodman said the speed and magnitude of the effects found in the study were greater than previously reported — findings he said were made possible by looking exclusively at new patients.

    The four drugs in the study, the most popular antipsychotic medications, are industry blockbusters, with combined sales of $12.7 billion last year. And while all four caused weight gain, there were differences in the extent of the side effects. Among them, Zyprexa, made by Eli Lilly & Company, showed the most severe effects on weight and metabolism. The study’s authors, and an accompanying JAMA editorial, called for closer monitoring of children taking the drugs, as well as additional long-term studies.

    The drugs are prescribed to children for schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and a broad range of less serious psychological conditions.

    Their use by children and teenagers has been rising steadily. A 2008 study found that patients under 19 years old accounted for 15 percent of antipsychotic drug use in 2004-5, compared with 7 percent in 1996.

    The study, funded by federal grants, is the largest study yet published on childhood use of the drugs. And because it is also the largest study of first-time users of the drugs, whether children or adults, it provided an opportunity to analyze the cause and severity of near-term side effects.

    As a result, the study goes further than previous research in distinguishing varying metabolic effects among the four drugs, according to Dr. Judith L. Rapoport, another expert who was not involved in the research.

    “It’s by far the best documentation of not just weight gain and metabolic changes but also suggesting there might be differences among the drugs,” Dr. Rapoport, chief of the child psychiatry branch at the National Institute of Mental Health, said in an interview. The lead researcher, Dr. Christoph U. Correll of Zucker Hillside Hospital in Queens and the Feinstein Institute for Medical Research in Manhasset, N.Y., said researchers had saved their blood work for future study of the molecular basis of the different drugs’ metabolic effects.

    “People should think twice before they actually prescribe the medications,” Dr. Correll said in a phone interview. The drugs studied are in a class known as atypical antipsychotics, which are second-generation psychiatric drugs that, in some cases, regulate the receptors in the brain that interact with the mood-altering hormones serotonin and dopamine

    Abilify and Risperdal are the only two of the four drugs approved as pediatric treatments, and only for the severe mental conditions schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. More than 70 percent of atypical antipsychotics’ use in children and teenagers has been off-label prescriptions for nonpsychotic conditions such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, according to Stephen Crystal, a Rutgers University professor who studies the drugs.

    Dr. Rapoport said Lilly’s Zyprexa drug, introduced in 1996, had been so heavily marketed that it was in widespread use before physicians began to recognize the severity of its side effects a few years ago. Zyprexa has continued selling in the range of nearly $3 billion a year in the United States even as concerns emerged about its tendency to cause patients to gain weight.

    Abilify, from Bristol-Myers Squibb, showed the least metabolic effects among the four drugs in the study, “It’s considered a very good but weaker drug,” Dr. Rapoport said.

    The other two drugs in the study, whose weight-related side effects fell between Zyprexa and Abilify, were Risperdal and Seroquel. The drugs are industry blockbusters. Seroquel from AstraZeneca, had United States sales of $2.2 billion in the first six months of this year, according to IMS Health, a data collection company. Abilify had sales of $1.9 billion during that same period; Zyprexa, $1.5 billion, and Risperdal, from Johnson & Johnson, $660 million.

    A Lilly spokesman, Jamaison R. Schuler, said the new research echoed Lilly’s own findings and previous studies about weight gain and metabolic changes that led to a label warning being placed on Zyprexa in October 2007. But in an interview, he said the drug was still essential to sparing children a lifetime of psychological suffering.

    “It’s important to recognize that severe mental illnesses, including schizophrenia and bipolar 1 disorder, often strike during adolescence and are devastating,” Mr. Schuler said..

    In an editorial accompanying the study in the journal, Dr. Christopher K. Varley and Dr. Jon McClellan, child psychiatrists at Seattle Children’s Hospital and the University of Washington school of medicine, wrote that “ominous long-term health implications” arise from weight gain and changes in blood fat levels early in life.

    “These results challenge the widespread use of atypical antipsychotic medications in youth,” they wrote.

    Dr. Varley said in a phone interview Monday that doctors had been loath to use the older antipsychotic medicines, like Thorazine and Haldol, because of neurological side effects. But he said the new data indicated that the newer ones should be prescribed more cautiously, particularly in young people.

    “In the course of less than 12 weeks, the weight gains are startling,” he said. “If you look at Zyprexa, the kids are gaining a pound and a half a week. Even with the drug Abilify, which is one that was not so prone to weight gain, kids still gained a pound a week. In addition, they had evidence in a very short period of time of other metabolic problems.”

    The study covered 272 patients visiting clinics in Brooklyn, Queens and Long Island from 2001 to 2007. Fifteen patients who stopped taking their medicine were used as a control group. Their weight stayed level. The 257 patients who stayed on their drugs took detailed tests, including a fasting blood test to check for high glucose levels.

    Their mean weight at the start of the study period was 118 pounds. But after about 11 weeks, those who took Zyprexa had gained 18.7 pounds; Seroquel, 13.4 pounds; Risperdal, 11.7 pounds; and Abilify, 9.7 pounds.

    Their waists typically expanded three inches with Zyprexa, two inches with the others.

    All but Abilify showed rapid and significant increases in one or more metabolic markers, which can presage adult obesity, hypertension and Type 2 diabetes. The metabolic markers included glucose, insulin, triglycerides and cholesterol.

    The authors noted that the study had limitations. Patients were not randomly assigned, so the baseline starting weights differed. Clinicians, given the choice, started heavier patients on Seroquel and those with the lowest fat mass on Zyprexia, who then gained the most, the data show.
    Also, the study did not control for dosing or other medications, which can affect outcome.

    Even so, Dr. Rapoport said the results were “straightforward” and benefited from the study size, thoroughness and especially the lack of previous use.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/28/bu...8psych.html?hp

  • #2
    Re: Bad Pharma

    My kids are in second and fifth grade. They need more exercise.

    I'd have gone crazy too if I'd been cooped up for endless hours per day. I wonder if anyone has done a study comparing time spent outdoors vs psychological disorders.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Bad Pharma

      Originally posted by LorenS View Post
      My kids are in second and fifth grade. They need more exercise.

      I'd have gone crazy too if I'd been cooped up for endless hours per day. I wonder if anyone has done a study comparing time spent outdoors vs psychological disorders.
      My stepson and his wife have our granddaughter on ADD medication. We, of course, were dead set against it, to no avail. It was supposed to last a month or two. She's in her second year, with "booster" drugs for evening homework. We are appalled. She's very active in sports so shows no exceptional weight gain. This ongoing condition is the monster in the basement of our family. (If there's a DSM book burning, let me know.)

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Bad Pharma

        Right on time....

        October 27, 2009

        Industry Years Behind on Testing Approved Drugs

        By GARDINER HARRIS

        WASHINGTON — Federal drug officials have long been criticized for failing to force drug makers to complete studies proving that their drugs work as hoped, and Congressional investigators on Monday released yet another report pointing out that some of these studies remain undone many years after being promised.

        The result is that doctors and patients remain unsure whether some critical medicines used to treat illnesses like cancer and heart disease are actually beneficial.

        Concerns about this situation reached such a pitch several years ago that Congress passed legislation in 2007 giving the Food and Drug Administration greater power to force drug makers to complete their promised studies and to fine companies that fail to follow through.

        In a report released Monday, the Government Accountability Office said that from 1992 through Nov. 20, 2008, the food and drug agency asked drug makers to complete 144 studies associated with 90 drug applications, and that drug makers had completed just two-thirds of the requested studies. Fifteen of the 52 uncompleted studies have been pending for more than five years, and several have been pending for more than eight years, the report said.

        “Since getting new powers and funding in 2007, F.D.A. has completely overhauled its system for tracking” these promised studies, said Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, the agency’s principal deputy commissioner. “This is a problem that’s being fixed.”

        Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, who called for the study, said, “The report should serve as an impetus for the F.D.A. to improve the postmarket surveillance of these drugs, giving patients and their doctors meaningful information and necessary safeguards.”

        All 90 drug applications reviewed by the investigators were submitted to the agency under a program intended to speed drugs to patients with life-threatening conditions like H.I.V./AIDS and cancer. Under this accelerated-approval program, the agency often approves medicines even though regulators are not certain they may be beneficial. For instance, a drug might have been shown to keep cancerous tumors from growing, but investigators did not wait the years needed to ensure that the drug actually extended life.

        This is a deliberate and risky trade-off between hope and speed on the one hand and certainty and deliberateness on the other. The drugs approved under this program may save thousands of lives while researchers try to prove that they are actually beneficial; or they may increase suffering and costs among the desperately ill.

        Drug makers are supposed to conduct confirmatory trials after approval to ensure that their medicines are working as well as hoped, but many take years longer than expected to fulfill their promises.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/27/he...da.html?ref=us

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Bad Pharma

          Originally posted by LorenS View Post
          My kids are in second and fifth grade. They need more exercise.

          I'd have gone crazy too if I'd been cooped up for endless hours per day. I wonder if anyone has done a study comparing time spent outdoors vs psychological disorders.
          This is almost the same

          http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/n...ct-your-health

          No surprises ... the more green space you have access to the better your mental health.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Bad Pharma

            Originally posted by don View Post
            My stepson and his wife have our granddaughter on ADD medication. We, of course, were dead set against it, to no avail. It was supposed to last a month or two. She's in her second year, with "booster" drugs for evening homework. We are appalled. She's very active in sports so shows no exceptional weight gain. This ongoing condition is the monster in the basement of our family. (If there's a DSM book burning, let me know.)
            Our daughter has significant developmental issues and we've avoided drugs, opting for a therapy approach. So far so good. Great progress, and of course no side effects. I would only consider medication if she did not respond to therapy.

            We live in the Boston, MA area and we've noticed that huge numbers of her cohorts (in special ed.) are medicated. Doctors are worshipped like gods here, and seem to hand out medication like candy. We've avoided the medical system and only used therapists (speech, OT) and our results have been excellent (to the extent that the school psychologist who did her 3 year re-evaluation said her progress was unbelievable).

            My wife's opinion (and I agree with her) is that an important part of growing up is learning to deal with who you are, and if you substitute drugs for therapy you risk the child missing this experience and being lifelong dependant on medication to be "normal".

            Of course, I have to be honest that we're dealing with autism and language problems, not bipolar or schizophrenia where I'm sure medication is warranted, but I'm equally sure it's massively over-prescribed.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Bad Pharma

              Originally posted by lurker View Post
              No surprises ... the more green space you have access to the better your mental health.
              Correlation is not causation.

              Perhaps healthier, wealthier people live nearer green spaces because they can afford to.
              Most folks are good; a few aren't.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Bad Pharma

                Originally posted by ThePythonicCow View Post
                Correlation is not causation.

                Perhaps healthier, wealthier people live nearer green spaces because they can afford to.
                Quite possibly, but I know I'm not alone in finding day trips to big cities (London, NY) to be fun but exhausting.

                I also found living in California's urban sprawl (Fremont) very depressing, and much prefer my new suburb of Boston, MA where there is much closer access to fields and woodland.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Bad Pharma

                  Originally posted by lurker View Post
                  I also found living in California's urban sprawl (Fremont) very depressing, and much prefer my new suburb of Boston, MA where there is much closer access to fields and woodland.
                  Good point. Fremont is depressing (I lived nearby in Pleasanton for a long time, so have some experience with Fremont.) I have also lived outside route 128 of Boston; it is better as you note.
                  Most folks are good; a few aren't.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Bad Pharma

                    When I lived in San Francisco, in my 20s and unaware of much, I remember feeling my face relax at the sight of Golden Gate Park. It was that obvious, even to a testosterone-fueled skirt chaser.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Bad Pharma

                      Originally posted by lurker View Post
                      We live in the Boston, MA area and we've noticed that huge numbers of her cohorts (in special ed.) are medicated. Doctors are worshipped like gods here
                      Absolutely. The presence of the many highly rated hospitals and doctors is worshiped around here like nothing else.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X