WebMd: new Enbrel/mtx study | Arthritis Information

 

The new study shows good results, but read carefully perhaps, just perhaps, how they got them?
http://www.webmd.com/rheumatoid-arthritis/news/20080715/drug-combo-fights-rheumatoid-arthritis
Suzanne2008-07-16 10:59:35Oh, Good God!

From the article:

"During that time, half of the patients taking Enbrel and methotrexate had their rheumatoid arthritis go into remission, compared to 28% of those taking methotrexate alone. And rheumatoid arthritis at least didn't worsen on X-ray in 80% of the Enbrel-plus-methotrexate group, compared to 59% of those only taking methotrexate.

Side effects were similar in both groups, according to the researchers, who included Paul Emery, MD, a professor at the University of Leeds in England.

Enbrel is marketed in the U.S. by the drug companies Amgen and Wyeth. Wyeth funded and designed the study, collected the data, and helped analyze the data, according to The Lancet.

An editorial published with the study points out that methotrexate injections might have been more effective than oral methotrexate."

At least didn't worsen?  Okay.  In 80% Enbrel/mtx vs. 59% oral mtx.  If the statistical range is +/- 5%, this could be 75% vs. 64%.  Not huge to me, when you consider the cost and risk.  And what if it was injectible mtx?  Anybody know the percentages for 'at least didn't worsen' between oral and inj. mtx?  Inj. mtx is said to have less side effects, too, so that would have helped that part of the study, too, I guess.

Good post Suzanne.  You seem to find the good ones!!!!!! THanks. Well, when I was taking mtx alone it didn't do nearly enough as far as controlling my pain and inflammation.  When enbrel was added their was a profound difference overnight (literally).  I'm thankful everyday that those greedy, lying, bastards over at wyeth & amgen got to my RD.    :)  [QUOTE=Linncn]Well, when I was taking mtx alone it didn't do nearly enough as far as controlling my pain and inflammation.  When enbrel was added their was a profound difference overnight (literally).  I'm thankful everyday that those greedy, lying, bastards over at wyeth & amgen got to my RD.    :)  [/QUOTE] Yes, Lincoln has used the right wording, Enbrel made a profound differance for me also..We are lucky to have the variety of meds that weren't available to our older relatives...Hope everyone can find the right meds/combo...Don't give up the hope!!!I wouldn't discount a clinical study simply because the drug manufacturer was involved.  Granted there have been occurrences in the past, as in Merck/vioxx, where complete findings of studies were not revealed, and that has shaken the public's trust in such studies, but I believe as a result, there is now greater transparency.  All clinical studies are suppose to be posted  in their entirety, online, for scrutiny, by  other professional medical researchers and the public. I'm with Linncn, thank you for being my thieving, lying bastard company as my life is a million times better.

Joy,

When I first started researching Humira I read that one of the scientists got involved because her grandma had RA.  Fortunately the evil drug company employed her.  We thank them for Humira every day.  All medicines are technically "toxins", including whatever they use in Microdose Therapy. The risk of a serious side effect from a biologic is about the same as turning blue from minocycline.   [QUOTE=Joe M]When I first started researching Humira I read that one of the scientists got involved because her grandma had RA.  Fortunately the evil drug company employed her.  We thank them for Humira every day.  All medicines are technically "toxins", including whatever they use in Microdose Therapy. [/QUOTE]

When I worked at a big pharma (and later went on to do consulting at several big pharmas), I was amazed at the dedication of the scientists.  Many of them practically lived in their tiny cinderblock offices and labs.  They worked insane hours not because they were told to, but because they were hell-bent on finding treatments for whatever disease they were targeting.  Vacations were spent at meetings.  Hell, even I've gone to an American Chemical Society meeting as my vacation (and yep, I paid for the whole thing myself).  Sure, there are some slackers out there, but by and large, the scientists at big pharma are very dedicated and driven individuals.  There is such a HUGE difference between walking the halls in the lab buildings vs. walking the halls up in Mahogany Row.  The lab buildings are like a college chem/bio building.  Many of the scientists have personal reasons for targeting their disease/condition of choice - perhaps they lost a father to heart disease, or have a sister with RA, or lost a friend to cancer back in high school.

I can't speak for the marketing side of the house... we always thought they were a big bag of idiots with expensive clothes and lots of cool trinkets.

And I'll never give up my foam rubber Viagra (discovered, by the way, while trying to find a cardiovascular drug... profits from Viagra help fund other less profitable ventures)!!!The problem with Pharma is that the scientists are no longer running the show.  The bean counters and the sales force is.  I read an article a while back about the 'change' when the first Pharma CEO wasn't a scientist and was instead a marketing bigwig and how that changed the world of medicine. [QUOTE=Pip!]The problem with Pharma is that the scientists are no longer running the show.  The bean counters and the sales force is.  I read an article a while back about the 'change' when the first Pharma CEO wasn't a scientist and was instead a marketing bigwig and how that changed the world of medicine. It sure does! [QUOTE=Pip!]It sure does! Fab!  Have you been to Wootshirt? [QUOTE=Pip!]Fab!  Have you been to Wootshirt? Suzanne and Pip,

Methodology

Harris Interactive® conducted the online survey on behalf of the Road Back Foundation between October 3 and 21, 2005, among 452 respondents with rheumatic conditions. Eligible respondents, defined as adults aged 18 and over who have been diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis or scleroderma and who have been on an antibiotic regimen for at least one month, completed a longer survey.  Respondents either volunteered to take a survey included as a link on the Road Back Foundation website or other websites that provided information about rheumatoid arthritis and scleroderma, or were sent an invitation via email to participate in the survey. The email list was provided by the Road Back Foundation.  Data were not weighted and therefore are only representative of those who were surveyed.  This online sample is not a probability sample.

About Harris Interactive®

Harris Interactive Inc. (www.harrisinteractive.com), based in Rochester, New York, is the 13th largest and the fastest-growing market research firm in the world, most widely known for The Harris Poll® and for its pioneering leadership in the online market research industry. Long recognized by its clients for delivering insights that enable confident business decisions, the company blends the science of innovative research with the art of strategic consulting to deliver knowledge that leads to measurable and enduring value.  Harris Interactive serves clients worldwide through its United States, Europe (www.harrisinteractive.com/europe) and Asia offices, its wholly-owned subsidiary Novatris in Paris, France (www.novatris.com), and through an independent global network of affiliate market research companies.

This is the APers truth in advertising and yet they have the audacity to question real scientific studies. They try to pass off this fake study as a real scientific study. Respondants didn't even have to prove their disease and no medical data was considered. Yeah, trust the APers.

 

Thank you Larry. Finally some facts, not to mention their own constant marketing campaign which twists the facts too.http://www.rheumatology.org/publications/hotline/archive/0195minocycline.asp?aud=mem

AP'ers have the MIRA study to back them up.  It was double-blind and showed effectiveness in mild-moderate RA.  I agree the Harris thing was nothing but a poll. 
By the way Lev, isn't your Dylan quote wrong?   Joe M and All, Don't disagree with anything you reported.  Here's one from 1999.  Considering the relatively benign side effects, if I got a mild case it would be the first thing I tried.  My wife tried it, didn't work so well, so now its Humira and it was life-changing.

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1916979

I don't think this should be an AP vs biologic thang, its a matter of consumers trusting info/research findings.  The possibility of a conflict of interest is always there, thus a need for full disclosure and transparency, so the watchdog groups/consumers can evaluate such studies.  A responsible, ethically minded company should be willing to do that, it would be good for business wouldn't it to have consumer confidence and trust in your product. Sorry, wasn't making it into a AP vs biologic thing... I think both have their place. [QUOTE=Joe M]Sorry, wasn't making it into a AP vs biologic thing... I think both have their place. [/QUOTE]

I don't think anybody thought you were.  Welcome to AI, you'll figure it out so enough.  Most people here do think both have their place, including me.
Joe, That really wasn't directed at you.  The discussion started in an ap vs biologic vein before you joined in.  These threads can go off in all kinds of directions, thats okay, I justed wanted to make the point a big issue is the consumer's trust, and how a company's transparency practices can instill that.   As for AP, I think I would have given it a try at first onset of RA.