Tag Archives: pharmaceutical company

Novartis Blood Pressure Medication Runs into Trouble


Novartis Blood Pressure Medication Runs into Trouble
by Gary Pepper, M.D.
Editor, Metabolism.com

In 2007 a new type of blood pressure lowering medication was brought to market by Novartis Pharmaceutical Company. This medication by the brand name Tekturna (aliskiran) works by blocking hormones that make up a circuit from the kidney to the blood vessels know as the RAAS system. This mechanism is distinct from all other blood pressure lowering medications available. By working via a completely novel pathway to lower blood pressure doctors were given another potent weapon in the war on high blood pressure. A second medication, Valturna, which combines an established blood pressure medication with Tekturna, was released by Novartis to the public in 2009. These drugs have been extremely popular due to their effectiveness and apparent freedom from serious side effects.
A warning about this class of drug was issued by Novartis, 2 weeks ago when it was forced to end the Altitude drug study due to apparent unforeseen complications in patients using Tekturna and Valturna. The study found a small but significant increase in stroke in diabetics with renal disease who were using these drugs. Although the group of patients in the Altitude study are up to 12 times more likely to develop stroke or heart attack under normal circumstances, Novartis had no choice but to end the study and issue a warning to the health care community about limiting the use of these drugs.

In my own practice I have found Tekturna and Valturna to be extremely effective and well tolerated. A survey of my colleagues revealed the same findings. Diabetes and high blood pressure very commonly occur together and national guidelines stress the need for excellent blood pressure control for diabetics to help prevent heart, kidney and eye complications of this disease. For doctors treating diabetics who recognize these patients as particularly high risk, having to significantly cut back or eliminate the use of Tekturna and Valturna is creating major concerns. Within the past week I have had to counsel numerous individuals about these issues and the solution is far from easy. For instance, one man with diabetes and early kidney disease and heart disease, with borderline high blood pressure despite using 4 different types of blood pressure medication including Tekturna has to decide with me, which is the greatest risk, going off the medication resulting in a rise in his blood pressure or continuing a drug which may pose a risk of its own.

These discussions are going on in doctor’s offices throughout the country with no good solution in sight. The only certainty is a flood of ads by lawyers which begin, “Have you ever been on Tekturna or Valturna….”.

Share this post

Behind the Disappearance of Armour Thyroid


After 50 years of exemplary therapeutic use and despite a large devoted following, Armour Thyroid and related dessicated thyroid generics have virtually disappeared from pharmacies in the U.S. An air of mystery with suggestions of conspiracy surround the shortage. The level of distress among Armour users confronted by their inability to obtain the medication, is extraordinary. Adding to the turmoil and confusion is the manufacturers’ continued reliance on flimsy and unconvincing explanations for their actions.

Several concerned individuals contacted the FDA for clarification of the Armour situation and received a prepared statement in response. A copy of the FDA’s letter explaining the government’s stance was posted to metabolism.com by an involved member. After studying the letter I believe I can offer a good explanation for the situation. The explanation, as I see it, is grounded in the fact that several thyroid medications such as Armour Thyroid but also including synthetic t4 medications like Synthroid, existed before the FDA was given full regulatory power. In 1973 the Supreme Court empowered the FDA to regulate the use of prescription medications in the U.S.. This meant that all prescription drugs would have to demonstrate to the FDA’s satisfaction, safety and efficacy for specific indications before pharmaceutical companies could promote the use of their drugs. Medications like Synthroid and Armour, already vital components of medical therapy for years before 1973 entered a grey area of legitimacy after that time.

Just a few years ago, I was astounded to hear from my pharmaceutical representatives that Synthroid faced being banned by the FDA since it never provided the FDA with the type of documentation of safety and efficacy that all modern medications had. After 30 years the FDA decided it wanted to rescind the right of the drug manufacturer to promote this medication which was considered safe and effective way before the FDA achieved regulatory power. What followed was a tense year during which the manufacturer of Synthroid went through the costly and bureaucratically intricate process needed for FDA approval, which it ultimately won.

What I believe is happening now is a similar scenario with Armour Thyroid and other dessicated thyroid products. What convinced me of this is the wording in the FDA letter which refers to Armour Thyroid as an illegal drug. The FDA has put Armour on its Most Wanted List and is intimidating the manufacturer (and prescribing physicians) by implying the law is being broken by continuing to make and use this drug. In the case of Synthroid, which enjoys the full support by the medical community and provides millions of dollars in annual sales the financial equation was a “no-brainer” in favor of putting the money into the process to gain approval.

Not so for Armour Thyroid which has been defamed by the American Academy of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) and who’s use is much more limited and far less profitable to the manufacturer. I can imagine that the pharmaceutical company has already done the math and decided that not making Armour makes more financial sense that to continue making the “illegal” product and going through the FDA gauntlet for approval.

Where does that leave the patients who depend on dessicated thyroid preparations and the physicians who prescribe it? With no way to force the manufacturer to make the drug or to make the FDA to back down on its stance my guess is that Armour and related products will simply cease to exist and alternative prescriptions will have to be written. Please remember, I am the messenger here and do not sanction or in anyway condone what I see as the most likely outcome of this predicament. Perhaps by recognizing the existing reality a strategy can be developed to prevent this outcome.

Gary Pepper, M.D., Editor-in-Chief. Metabolism.com

Share this post