"Quetiapine comes from the root word 'quiet'"

[UPDATE: I had some funky issues with my table. It should be fixed now. Sorry about that.]

The first time I visited my psychiatrist for my initial evaluation, he gave me the option of choosing one of three medications: Seroquel, Lithium, or Lamictal. He handed me information about Seroquel and Lamictal. I did some research on both meds (lithium was out of the question because I don’t have time to get my blood checked constantly) and Lamictal sounded like a way better deal than Seroquel. I found mental health blog Furious Seasons (probably via The Trouble With Spikol) and read numerous posts on Seroquel’s adverse effects and all the good stuff AstraZeneca doesn’t tell anyone. From Philip Dawdy’s “Seroquel, The Bipolar Pill?” post, here’s what stood out to me:

“He told her that he didn’t think Seroquel worked benignly for patients and that the increased blood-sugar levels and cholesterol levels associated with its use were unacceptable to him. She broke out a recent paper which claimed that there were no metabolic syndrome problems with Seroquel.”

The post got me thinking. One of the materials I received from my psychiatrist was an article on how Seroquel seems to help the depressive part of bipolar disorder. He had a stack of these articles. My guess is not that he’s an overzealous reader of various newspapers but received the glowing article from – you got it! – a pharma rep. The article was taken from the August 2005 issue of Clinical Psychiatry News. (NOTE: I received the article in November 2006.)

Clinical Psychiatry News’ publication goals:

“Clinical Psychiatry News is an independent newspaper that provides the practicing psychiatrist with timely and relevant news and commentary about clinical developments in the field and about the impact of health care policy on the specialty and the physician’s practice.”

Good thing they didn’t say objectively.

I don’t know much about ClinPsych’s reputation and whether they are generally a good paper that reports things objectively. However, the article, “Atypical Quetiapine Appears Effective for Bipolar Depression,” reads like a press release. I’m not happy about receiving (practically) PR material from my doctor when trying to make an unbiased decision.

The article’s lede:

“The atypical antipsychotic quetiapine led to significantly greater reductions in bipolar depression than did placebo within the first week of treatment and throughout an 8-week randomized, controlled study of 511 patients, Andrew J. Cutler, M.D., said.”

Dr. Andrew CutlerDr. Cutler? Who IS Dr. Cutler? No research necessary; look no further than the article itself:

“The differences between the placebo group and each quetiapine group were significant at each weekly assessment, said Dr. Cutler of the University of South Florida, Tampa. He is a speaker and consultant for, and has received research grants from, the company that makes quetiapine: AstraZeneca.”

At least they disclosed his financial affiliations.

It is also worth noting that Dr. Cutler also founded a clinical research company, CORE Research, which runs many of the clinical trials that he’s involved in. CORE Research’s background details:

“CORE Research, Inc. is a private research company with three offices in the Central Florida area. CORE specializes in pharmaceutical research and psychopharmacology for mental illnesses such as Bipolar Disorder, Depression, Anxiety, Schizophrenia, Attention Deficit Disorder, and Insomnia.”

Private + Pharmaceutical research + Psychopharmacology = Funding from Big Pharma Companies

I sound like I’m touting some grand conspiracy theory. (OK, maybe I am.) CORE’s background bio makes the company sound objective and unaffiliated, which isn’t the case. If Dr. Cutler has “received research grants from” not only AstraZeneca, but other companies, it’s in his best interest to make sure that their pharmaceutical products turn out OK. Namely in the interest of AZ – remember: he’s a consultant for them.

How can I expect to make a decision about which medication to take (remember it’s between Lamictal and Seroquel now) based on promotional materials from pharm companies and – oh – an article touting the benefits of Seroquel with quotes only from the study’s lead author who is paid to say good things about the company’s products?

I didn’t.

Then how did I decide on Lamictal over Seroquel? Wikipedia‘s outline of each medication’s side effects, of course, in addition to other materials. (Don’t EVER overlook the Patient Safety Information of any medication. Unless you’re reading about the molecular structure – ignore that.)

Lamictal (lamotrigine) side effects Seroquel (quetiapine) side effects
Headaches Sedation
Insomnia Agitation
Insomnia Constipation
Major weight loss Memory problems (i.e. anterograde amnesia)
Blurred/double vision Headaches
Muscle aches Abnormal liver tests
Lack of coordination Dizziness
Sleepiness Upset stomach
Nausea Substantial weight gain
Vomiting Stuffy nose feeling
Rash (Stevens-Johnson syndrome) [uncommon in adults] Neuroleptic malignant syndrome [rare]
Binds to melanin-containing tissues (i.e. iris of the eye) Tardive dyskinesia [rare]
Diabetes [unclear]
Cataracts [possible]

Not that Lamictal’s side effects looked like a walk in the park, but considering that I’d already had awful trouble with weight gain on Paxil and Lexapro – nearly 50 lbs. – Seroquel was a serious no-go on my part. That and I don’t mind major weight loss from Lamictal. (Although I have been told Lamictal has no effect on weight.) Below is a copy of the article I received from my psychiatrist or you can just go and read the archived full text at Clinical Psychiatry News.

Quetiapine article

Loose Screws Mental Health News

Yeah – the copy editor in me wants to try “Loose Screws News.” For now.

Clinical Psychology and Psychiatry is among many of my favorite blogs to read. In this particular post, he rips on Eli Lilly’s zyprexafacts.com, which was set up in response to NYT articles that alleged Lilly drug reps pushed Zyprexa to physicians for off-label uses. I hope to just have a stupid ol’ time and rip on each Eli Lilly press release in response to each NYT article, but we’ll see what happens. I’ve already got one lined up with notes scribbled on the printout; I just need to transfer it into electronic form. (Oh, the joys of being a transit commuter.)

Liz Spikol linked to an article originally published in bp magazine about how difficult marriages are when one spouse suffers from bipolar disorder. The saddest statistic I’ve ever read:

“In the United States and Canada, at least 40 percent of all marriages fail. But the statistics for marriages involving a person who has bipolar disorder are especially sobering—an estimated 90 percent of these end in divorce, according to a November 2003 article, ‘Managing Bipolar Disorder,’ in Psychology Today.”

Um, joy considering that I’m I suffer from bipolar and have been married for just over a year now. This strikes incredible fear in my heart. It’s not that we don’t love and care for each other, but I can only imagine how much a spouse who doesn’t suffer from bipd can take. I hate to say it, but I keep waiting for my husband to walk out on me. Not because I’m pessimistic (OK, I am, but that’s beside the point), but because I fear that he’ll reach a point where he’ll say, “I can’t take anymore of this! I’ve dealt with this for 10 years and nothing’s changed, nothing’s getting better. I’m sorry, but I can’t be married to you and deal with this anymore.” Just waiting.

Kelly Osborne Retarded celebrity story of the day: Kelly Osborne suffers from depression because she’s so privileged. But hey! — she’ll pose for Playboy and get photoshopped so she can feel better. *gags*

If you’re mentally ill and fired for it, don’t bother suing. It looks like the mentally ill don’t have a case unless there’s a physical illness to somehow “prove” it:

“Sixteen years after Congress enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), people with psychiatric disabilities are faring worse in court cases against employers for discrimination than are people with physical disabilities, researchers have found in a national study.

‘People with psychiatric disabilities were less likely to receive a monetary award or job-related benefit, more likely to feel as though they were not treated fairly during the legal proceedings and more likely to believe they received less respect in court,’ said Jeffrey Swanson, Ph.D., a study investigator and an associate professor of psychiatry at Duke University Medical Center.”

I’m not sure how to solve this problem. Psychiatric disabilities are less tangible and harder to prove than a physical disability. It’s easier to wage war against a company if you suffer from a bad back vs. if you suffer from depression. (Whether or not the bad back is a fictional illness is up to you.)

Another oy moment. (The Long Islander in me is coming back full force.) Got a pet that’s misbehaving? Put him or her on an antidepressant. Double oy.

New Zealand is being introduced to lamotrigine (trade name Lamictal in the U.S.). Good luck, bipolar New Zealanders. Best wishes.

And finally, a study has discovered that about half of patients who suffer from some kind of severe burn suffer from clinical depression. (Shouldn’t someone diagnose this as PTSD? That’s pretty traumatic, if you ask me.) While the finding isn’t surprising, the study highlights the need not only to treat the physical ailment, but also to address the mental healing necessary to overcome stress from the injury.

Patient Responsibility

“An article on brain shocks from about.com linked to a statement at socialaudit.org.uk on venlafaxine withdrawal. It seems that when coming off of venlafaxine, it is best to use fluoxetine (Prozac) in conjunction with it. Somehow, Prozac’s effects can minimize or negate the side effects of Effexor allowing for an uneventful withdrawal. I’m seeing my psychiatrist later today and I might bring up the idea with him. He might think one of two things: a) I’m crazy (pun not intended) or b) I don’t know what I’m talking about. My guess is he’ll choose the latter of the two.

Unlike most patients, I know more about meds than ‘the average bear.’”

UPDATE: I asked my doctor about going on fluoxetine to offset the effect of venlafaxine withdrawal. He looked up, somewhat shocked, and said, “Yeah.” So then I pushed and said, “Well, I’d like 10 mg then.” lol. He wrote out a prescription for 10 mg of Prozac in addition to bumping me up from 150 mg to 200 mg of Lamictal. I took the fluoxetine (Prozac is now a generic drug) last night and it has offset the intensity of the brain shocks. I experience them but they are much more mild compared to yesterday when they were moderate to severe. Yesterday, I was barely able to drive; today, I drove nearly an hour to work on a somewhat urban road with good reflexes and almost normal cognitive functioning. I can only hope that the Prozac continues to aid my withdrawal issues. And I was happy to wake up this morning without wondering why I dreamt that I was in a department store with parrots singing Gwen Stefani’s “Wind It Up” and swinging like moneys instead of flying.

You get the idea: Effexor causes some strange dreams.

Continue reading “Patient Responsibility”

More on Zyprexa

More on Zyprexa, folks. It just isn't going to go away.

NYT reporter Alex Berenson, continuing his stellar coverage of Zyprexa's risks and exposing Eli Lilly's deceitfulness, has uncovered a recent case of a man who died using Zyprexa. John Eric Kauffman has a complicated medical, which might have led to his death. However, he was a mentally ill patient on Zyprexa and as a result of his death, Eli Lilly must report his death to "federal regulators," which it is required to do under law. However, despite his heavy smoking, he gained 80 lbs. on Zyprexa – which possibly led him to develop heart disease and become sedentary after being active most of his life. His mother says that Zyprexa did help him stave off the psychosis of his bipolar disorder, but his mother wonders if the risk was worth the early death of her son. Kauffman at 41 years old weighed 259 lbs. at the time of his death. He was 5' 10".

Which leads to the question of whether mentally ill patients should choose between taking Zyprexa – which CAN help mentally ill people – and dealing with its significant side effects or risk not taking Zyprexa when other medications won't work. In light of all this, should a doctor even continue to prescribe Zyprexa after seeing its awful side effects but left with no other choice (given that a patient is treatment-resistant to most medications)?

Eli Lilly's response to this continues to be appalling:

"Zyprexa is a lifesaving drug and it has helped millions of people worldwide with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder regain control of their lives."

It may be true that it helps people "regain control of their lives," but as for being a lifesaving drug – that's unlikely. Zyprexa has been shown to induce diabetes, obesity, hyperglycemia, and now, heart disease and death. I commend Australian regulators for looking into the details of Lilly downplaying the risk of Zyprexa and hope that they will make the information public – a different course than what the U.S. federal government seems to be taking. Lilly's 2006 settlement with patients who developed diabetes and other health problems is pure evidence that despite their constant denials, Lilly's hiding something in an effort to make profits.

My prediction: The FDA will eventually slap a black-box warning on Zyprexa, warning patients that it makes them more prone to diabetes and its other ill health effects.

NYT video on age-related health

The NYT video on health includes a story about how health programs are aimed at baby boomers who are intent on staving off age-related problems such as dementia. (Related to Zyprexa being used off-label for dementia and all…)

NYT report

ADDENDUM: Eli Lilly wins Round 1 in court. According to the NYT, a federal appeals court has ruled in favor of Lilly in a challenge to its patent on Zyprexa. Ivax (affiliated with Teva Pharmaceutical Industries) and Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories filed a suit saying that a lower court ruling in Lilly’s favor was wrong. Lilly’s patent on Zyprexa expires in 2011. And random Zyprexa data because Seroquel actually looks better in this instance:

“Sales of Zyprexa dropped 16 percent and fell behind AstraZeneca’s Seroquel as America’s best-selling antipsychotic in 2005, according to IMS Health, which provides data on drug sales.”

Loose Screws Mental Health News

NAMI is touting a new atypical… in the press release for Johnson & Johnson. Michael J. Fitzpatrick, executive director of NAMI lent a statement  in J&J’s pr about Risperdal’s sibling, Invega. *sniff, sniff* Something smells fishy about this. Makes me wonder if these non-profits bag money from Big Pharma under the table… (source: Furious Seasons)
An electronic ping sent from Sprint to the police helped save the life of a college student who tried to commit suicide, according to Newsday. A ping also helped save the lives of James Kim’s wife and children after getting stuck in the mountains of Oregon. This ping thing is interesting. Especially since Newsday needs to put quotes around it because ping isn’t a real vocabulary word… yet.

Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night.

ADDENDUM: Oooh, ooh, ooh – just found out: Any family that has a minor who may have consumed Paxil or Paxil CR is eligible for a stake in a $63.8 million settlement with GlaxoSmithKline. More info about the settlement at paxilpediatricsettlement.com. Apparently, it seems as though GSK covered up information about the medications’ safety and efficacy. This is one I’d like to learn more about considering I’ve been on Paxil. Not as a minor but the settlement raises questions  regarding GSK withholding information about Paxil’s safety and efficacy regarding adults.

Is it now fashionable to sue pharma companies for not making all of their information public?

Catching up…

After a hectic week between work and excessive blogging, I've finally caught up to the latest NYTimes articles on Eli Lilly's troubles with Zyprexa.  I also read the NYT's editorial on the issue. The last paragraph caught my eye:

"Lilly contends that it has never promoted Zyprexa for unapproved uses and has always shown its marketing materials to the Food and Drug Administration, as required by law. Both claims ought to be tested in Congressional hearings that should focus on how well the industry complies with existing laws and how effectively the F.D.A. regulates the industry’s marketing materials."

Furious Seasons and CL Psych beat me to the punch on the skepticism. Congressional hearings would do nothing and I am even more skeptical of the FDA. Pharma companies like Lilly probably slip Dr. Andrew C. von Eschenbach some money to get their stuff approved. But I'm merely speculating because I'm tired and haven't done more research on this at the moment.

Continue reading “Catching up…”

NYT plunges ahead with Eli Lilly story; Furious Seasons on the case

While the court is ordering the lawyer who released internal Eli Lilly docuemnts to hand them back, the New York Times is plunging ahead with more shocking revelations concerning the documents. God bless The New York Times and Alex Berenson for taking this story, running with it, and making it public. Even if the company documents become confidential, the story is out and people WILL sue in an attempt to make it public. Patients have a right to know what is affecting their bodies and why Zyprexa causes more medical complications than it helps overcome mental illness.

And God bless Furious Seasons. I don't have time to blog on it, but he does. Head over there to read his critical analysis on the whole situation.