IBJNews

Potential Lilly drug doubles good cholesterol

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Eli Lilly and Co.’s experimental drug doubled levels of good cholesterol in a study, setting up a race with Merck & Co. and Roche Holding AG to develop a new class of medicines to lower heart risk.

Good cholesterol, or HDL, sweeps the bad form of the fatty substance, known as LDL, out of arteries, reducing clogs. The treatment being developed by Indianapolis-based Lilly, evacetrapib, boosted HDL by as much as 129 percent and lowered bad cholesterol as much as 36 percent, the research found.

The data, reported at the American Heart Association meeting Tuesday in Orlando, Fla., were similar to those seen last year with a rival from Merck & Co., called anacetrapib, researchers at the conference said. The Lilly trial is in the second of three phases of testing generally required for U.S. approval.

The Merck and Roche products are in the final stage. Both drugs are predicted to be blockbusters with more than $5 billion in annual sales if they are approved.

“We got everything we could hope for from this drug, and maybe more,” said Steven Nissen, the study’s senior author and chief of cardiology at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, in a telephone interview. “We are going to move evacetrapib forward as rapidly as possible” into a final-stage trial to prove it lowers heart risk.

Lilly shares were down 21 cents Tuesday morning, to $37.44 each.

All three rivals aim to avoid the toxicity seen with a previous good cholesterol drug from New York-based Pfizer Inc. that was abandoned in 2006 after it triggered deaths in a study.

Like the failed Pfizer drug, all three medicines boost good cholesterol by blocking a molecule called CETP. Unlike the Pfizer compound, Lilly’s drug didn’t raise blood pressure or levels of an adrenal hormone called aldosterone, the results show.

Lilly plans to meet with regulators “in the very near future” to discuss starting a final-stage trial as soon as possible, David Moller, a vice president for the company said. That trial would aim to show that the Lilly drug reduces heart attacks and cardiovascular deaths when given with standard cholesterol-lowering therapy.

“We feel we have a very competitive molecule,” he said. “This is a home-grown Lilly molecule that we diligently pursued under the radar of the public eye with the notion that we could get around” the problems seen with Pfizer’s torcetrapib.

The Lilly trial, in 398 patients, found that evacetrapib worked well combined with common cholesterol-lowering drugs such as Pfizer’s Lipitor, Crestor from London-based AstraZeneca Plc and simvastatin, the generic version of Merck’s Zocor.

If good cholesterol-raising treatments work, “it is going to revolutionize what we do,” said Christopher Cannon, a cardiologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, who has worked on Whitehouse Station, N.J.-based Merck’s compound. “If HDL means anything, these drugs should be amazing,” he said in an interview at the heart meeting.

Only giant trials in thousands of heart patients can prove if the CETP medicines really prevent heart attacks and deaths. Merck’s anacetrapib drug is in the process of being tested in a study of 30,000 heart patients.

“These could be as big as the statins were 20 years ago” if the data continues to be positive, Nissen said.

The promising Lilly results come as another marketed drug that modestly raises good cholesterol, Abbott Laboratories’ Niaspan, failed to show any benefit in reducing heart attacks and heart deaths when given with generic Zocor. The trial was stopped early by the National Institutes of Health in May because of lack of benefit and possible higher stroke risk.

Detailed results from the Niaspan research are also being presented at the heart meeting.

Patients on Niaspan, an extended release form of niacin, saw their HDL increase by 25 percent in the study versus just 9.8 percent HDL increase in those patients who received placebo. Yet the overall rate of heart attacks and several other cardiovascular events in both groups were virtually the same, the study found.

The higher number of strokes in patients who got Niaspan, a $927 million sales generator in 2010, weren’t statistically significant, said William Boden, a study investigator and professor at the University at Buffalo Schools of Medicine and Public Health.

“The clinical results were chillingly null,” wrote Robert Giugliano from Brigham and Women’s Hospital in an editorial accompanying the study in the New England Journal of Medicine.

For patients with stable heart disease whose bad cholesterol is under control, “there is no reason to prescribe niacin to raise low levels of HDL,” Boden said. Niacin still has a role in patients who can’t get their cholesterol under control with statin drugs, he said.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • other
    Vitamin C and lysine at the right levels can make those drugs unnecessary. Linus Pauling & Matthias have documented it.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Liberals do not understand that marriage is not about a law or a right ... it is a rite of religous faith. Liberals want "legal" recognition of their homosexual relationship ... which is OK by me ... but it will never be classified as a marriage because marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman. You can gain / obtain legal recognition / status ... but most people will not acknowledge that 2 people of the same sex are married. It's not really possible as long as marriage is defined as one man and one woman.

  2. That second phrase, "...nor make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunitites of citizens..." is the one. If you can't understand that you lack a fundamental understanding of the Constitution and I can't help you. You're blind with prejudice.

  3. Why do you conservatives always go to the marrying father/daughter, man/animal thing? And why should I keep my sexuality to myself? I see straights kissy facing in public all the time.

  4. I just read the XIV Amendment ... I read where no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property ... nor make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunitites of citizens ... I didn't see anything in it regarding the re-definition of marriage.

  5. I worked for Community Health Network and the reason that senior leadership left is because they were not in agreement with the way the hospital was being ran, how employees were being treated, and most of all how the focus on patient care was nothing more than a poster to stand behind. Hiring these analyst to come out and tell people who have done the job for years that it is all being done wrong now...hint, hint, get rid of employees by calling it "restructuring" is a cheap and easy way out of taking ownership. Indiana is an "at-will" state, so there doesn't have to be a "reason" for dismissal of employment. I have seen former employees that went through this process lose their homes, cars, faith...it is very disturbing. The patient's as well have seen less than disireable care. It all comes full circle.

ADVERTISEMENT