Comments on: Amylin Stock Is Pummeled At Diabetes Meeting http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/06/amylin-stock-is-pummeled-at-diabetes-meeting/ News, Comment and Conversation Sun, 21 Mar 2010 02:21:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: william t beyha http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/06/amylin-stock-is-pummeled-at-diabetes-meeting/#comment-359265 william t beyha Tue, 10 Jun 2008 21:05:59 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=14030#comment-359265 dr. denise l faustman can cure diabetes and explain the mechanisms behind autoimmune diseases and the danger of present drugs administered for same see pubmed.org faustman dl and faustmanlab.org amylin is slow dr. denise l faustman can cure diabetes and explain the mechanisms behind autoimmune diseases and the danger of present drugs administered for same
see pubmed.org faustman dl
and faustmanlab.org

amylin is slow

]]> By: Lehman http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/06/amylin-stock-is-pummeled-at-diabetes-meeting/#comment-359064 Lehman Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:13:56 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=14030#comment-359064 Jim Birchenough is from FBR? I thought he was at Lehman still? Jim Birchenough is from FBR? I thought he was at Lehman still?

]]> By: Scott http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/06/amylin-stock-is-pummeled-at-diabetes-meeting/#comment-358893 Scott Mon, 09 Jun 2008 21:13:11 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=14030#comment-358893 Let us not forget, these are the same brilliant analysts who once forecast that Pfizer's Exubera would be a $1 billion blockbuster. Let's look at what Novo Nordisk's carefully-timed press release actually said: liraglutide was superior in controlling blood sugar in patients with type 2 diabetes according to a small clinical trial comparing itself to to Eli Lilly and Co's and Amylin Pharmaceuticals Inc's first-on-the-market drug in the same category Byetta (exenatide). Notably, the company reports that in a 26-week head-to-head trial involving a mere 464 people, the reductions in HbA1c was 1.1% vs. 0.8% for Byetta. The company made special note that this was a "statistically significant" reduction. This was a relatively small study of less than 500 people observed for a relatively short period of time -- a little over 6 months. Whenever you deal with sample sizes that small, the mathematics may indeed indicate that a finding is "statistically significant," but let us not forget just how much that difference actually is: 0.2% -- the practical impact of a difference of that size that while it may be statistically significant based on a tiny sample of less than 500 people, but is hardly enough to compel someone to even bother switching brands, let alone adjust to a new medication unless there is a financial incentive for them to do so. We should keep in mind what's going on here: Novo's drug is a "me-too" drug that is several years late to the market, so its obvious they are working hard to create a buzz about the product, but its by no means a guaranteed blockbuster. Let us not forget, these are the same brilliant analysts who once forecast that Pfizer’s Exubera would be a $1 billion blockbuster. Let’s look at what Novo Nordisk’s carefully-timed press release actually said: liraglutide was superior in controlling blood sugar in patients with type 2 diabetes according to a small clinical trial comparing itself to to Eli Lilly and Co’s and Amylin Pharmaceuticals Inc’s first-on-the-market drug in the same category Byetta (exenatide). Notably, the company reports that in a 26-week head-to-head trial involving a mere 464 people, the reductions in HbA1c was 1.1% vs. 0.8% for Byetta. The company made special note that this was a “statistically significant” reduction.

This was a relatively small study of less than 500 people observed for a relatively short period of time — a little over 6 months. Whenever you deal with sample sizes that small, the mathematics may indeed indicate that a finding is “statistically significant,” but let us not forget just how much that difference actually is: 0.2% — the practical impact of a difference of that size that while it may be statistically significant based on a tiny sample of less than 500 people, but is hardly enough to compel someone to even bother switching brands, let alone adjust to a new medication unless there is a financial incentive for them to do so. We should keep in mind what’s going on here: Novo’s drug is a “me-too” drug that is several years late to the market, so its obvious they are working hard to create a buzz about the product, but its by no means a guaranteed blockbuster.

]]>