Bio Job Blog : Bio Jobs : Biotechnology Jobs : Biopharmaceutical Jobs : Bioscience, Biotech Jobs : Bio Job Blog : Biocareer : Bio-Business Training, Biotechnology Training : Jobs in Biology : Internships in Biology : Internships in Biotechnology

It seems like nothing is going right for Merck these days. On Monday, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a “not approvable”–aka a rejection letter–for Merck’s new cholesterol drug called Cordaptive or MK-0524A. The highly-touted drug, which Merck executives hoped would replace Merck’s blockbuster cholesterol drug, Zocor (which lost patent protection a couple of years ago), can both lower LDL (bad) and raise HDL (good) cholesterol. Although experts believe that these properties should benefit people with high cholesterol, the results from recent clinical trials suggest that drugs that raise LDL and lower HDL cholesterol may have safety problems.

Cordaptive consists of an extended-release form of niacin (a B vitamin) and another agent that inhibits a niacin side effect called flushing — redness, burning and tingling of the face. Niacin has been used to control cholesterol for decades. Abbott Laboratories already sells an extended-release form of niacin called Niaspan.

Despite positive results from recent clinical trials and pending approval by the European Union, the agency rejected Merck’s NDA. Regulators also rejected Cordaptive as a brand name. It is likely that FDA is scrutinizing and proceeding cautiously with new cholesterol medications because of the recent flap over Zetia and Vytorin (which are co-marketed and sold by Merck and Schering Plough). As you may recall, both companies have been accused of trying to protect sales of the two drugs by delaying results of a study that showed Vytorin worked no better than Zocor, which is much cheaper.  Merck’s stock price dropped about 5% yesterday after the company announced that it received a not approvable letter from FDA.

Although MK-0524A may ultimately reach the US market, I wouldn’t count on it anytime soon. Merck has seriously tarnished its reputation with FDA because of the Vioxx, Vytorin and Singular controversies. The old adage, “You reap what you sow” is particularly apt in this instance. Look for more “asset reallocation” moves in Rahway.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

There has been some confusion surrounding the reporting of results from the Enhance Trial. As you know, the results from this study showed that the cholesterol-lowering drug Vytorin—a combination of Zetia and Zocor (a statin) —was no better than a generic version of Zocor by itself at controlling atherosclerosis.

In the Enhance clinical trial, 720 patients were treated with Vytorin or a generic version of Zocor and the amount of plaque that accumulated in the arteries of both groups was assessed by blood vessel imaging. Because Vytorin lowers LDL-cholesterol more than Zocor alone, both Schering –Plough and Merck (the companies that sponsored the trial) expected the patients who took Vytorin to have less growth of plaque in their arteries than those who took generic Zocor alone. As we all now know, this was not the case. In fact, there are some data which suggests that Vytorin treatment may actually enhance or promote plaque deposition and growth.

Since arterial plaque is closely associated with heart attack and stroke, the results from the Enhance trial led some to suggest that Vytorin doesn’t work any better than Zocor at preventing heart attack or stroke. While this may prove to be the case, there are currently no data to substantiate or refute this assertion. Those data will be generated in planned outcome trials that will measure the incidence of heart attack and stroke in patients taking Vytorin or Zocor. Merck and Schering-Plough began enrolling patients for these studies in 2006 and don’t expect any results before 2012. This may be too little, too late.

Merck and Schering have come under fire for not releasing the results from the Enhance trial in a timely fashion. A Congressional committee investigating the Vytorin controversy alleges that Merck and Schering Plough executives knew about the results of the Enhance studies at least two years before they released the data. The companies repeatedly delayed releasing the results of the trial, however, saying publicly that many of the images of the arteries were unclear and might need to be re-examined. Both companies have also have been criticized for delaying the initiation of the planned outcomes trials.

Shares of Merck and Schering-Plough plummeted yesterday following Sunday’s announcement at the American College of Cardiology meeting in Chicago.

Until next time….

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (avoid NJ)!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Unraveling the Cholesterol Conundrum

By now, I am sure that everyone is sick of hearing about Zetia, Vytorin, cholesterol levels and heart disease. Whether you like it or not, results from the now infamous Enhance study have certainly caused many scientists and physicians to rethink the relationship between cholesterol levels and heart disease and stroke. Conventional wisdom (and current medical dogma) holds that low LDL cholesterol levels reduce the risk and incidence of heart disease and stroke. This belief is now so widespread and entrenched in that the medical community that FDA now approves drugs to prevent heart disease, as it did with Zetia and Vytorin, solely on the evidence that they lower LDL cholesterol levels. Unfortunately, Enhance study results indicate that lowering LDL cholesterol levels alone are not sufficient to reduce the incidence of heart disease or stroke. 

Zetia, one of the active ingredients of Vytorin, lowers blood LDL cholesterol levels by reducing absorption of cholesterol in the gut (from foods that we eat). In contrast, the other ingredient in Vytorin, Zocor, is a statin that acts to lower LDL cholesterol by interfering with its production in the body. The results of the Enhance study, which showed that Vytorin doesn’t reduce the risk of heart disease or stroke any better than Zocor itself, suggest that the only way to prevent heart disease and stroke (by lowering LDL cholesterol) is through statin use. This assertion is supported by results from clinical trials involving Lipitor and Zocor (both statins), which showed that lowering LDL cholesterol also resulted in a lower incidence of heart disease and stroke. This suggests that statins may act to reduce heart disease and stroke by mechanisms other than their LDL cholesterol-lowering properties. Indeed, statins have also been found to reduce inflammation, keep artery walls flexible and healthy and help to maintain LDL and HDL cholesterol balance in the blood.

There were hints along the way which suggested that the relationship between LDL cholesterol and heart disease and stroke were not as straightforward as it seemed. For example, torcetrapib, a Pfizer drug that lowers LDL and raises HDL cholesterol, was being evaluated in clinical studies that were subsequently halted because it increased the risks of heart attack and stroke rather than prevent them. Another example is estrogen replacement therapy which is known to lower LDL cholesterol levels but failed to reduce the incidence of heart attack and stroke in clinical studies. Nevertheless, it did not take much to convince FDA that lowering LDL cholesterol levels alone was sufficient to prevent or reduce the incidence heart disease a stroke. This notion was strongly substantiated by results from clinical studies with Lipitor and Zocor which showed a strong relationship between lowering LDL cholesterol and reducing the risk and incidence of heart disease and stroke. Unfortunately, it now appears likely that the ability of statin drugs to reduce the incidence of heart disease and stroke is related to other mechanisms besides lowering LDL cholesterol. For an excellent historical review and recap of the cholesterol story, I suggest reading an article is this Sunday’s NY Times by Gary Taubes.

So what are the lessons learned from this story? First, I think that it is unwise to make assumptions about cause and effect relationships until all of the data is carefully analyzed and vetted. Second, it is our obligation as scientists, whether we are company employees or not, to point out inconsistencies or problems with prevailing theories regardless of personal or professional consequences. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, FDA must not allow drug companies to influence or affect the type or amount of data that it requires to approve new drugs.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)
• Share Link

Merck and Schering Plough have taken out two-page ads in several major newspapers defending their cholesterol drugs Zetia and Vytorin whose efficacy has been seriously questioned following release of data from a clinical study called ENHANCE late last week. The new ad campaign takes direct aim at the fallout from ENHANCE which showed that neither Zetia nor Vytorin (Zetia plus Zocor) is more effective in preventing heart attack or stroke than a cheaper generic version of Zocor alone.

The ad offsets the most important line in boldface: "All of us at Merck and Schering-Plough proudly stand behind the established efficacy and safety profiles of ZETIA and VYTORIN." And then it's "signed" by Robert J. Spiegel MD, Chief Medical Officer of Schering and Merck’s VP of External Medical and Scientific Affairs, Richard Murray MD. However, this advertising blitz may be too little, too late. Consumer and physician confidence in Merck and Schering Plough have fallen precipitously after the ENHANCE data were released last week.

According to various sources, the companies reportedly spent more than $100 million on a highly visible, slick marketing campaign to promote Vytorin and Zetia last year. Who doesn’t recognize the ubiquitous commercials with the folksy violin music and the "colorful" relatives dressed to look like food to accentuate the point that cholesterol levels are related to family history (genetics) and the foods that one consume. They have taken a new tact with today’s ads which showcase a matter-of-fact advertising approach. We'll see if it the new, less flamboyant advertising campaign can staunch the hemorrhaging that it taking place today at both companies.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link