Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Asthma / September 2006
More Advair Deaths. Be Careful!
|
|
Thread rating:  |
dave - 26 Aug 2006 14:00 GMT Three common asthma inhalers containing the drugs salmeterol or formoterol may be causing four out of five U.S. asthma-related deaths per year and should be taken off the market, researchers from Cornell and Stanford universities have concluded after a search of medical literature. They base these conclusions on a statistical analysis of 19 published trials involving 33,826 patients. This so-called meta-analysis found that patients who inhaled the long-acting beta-agonists salmeterol (trade names Serevent and Advair, both made by GlaxoSmithKline) or formoterol (trade name Foradil, made by Novartis Pharmaceuticals) were 3.5 times more likely to die from asthma and 2.5 times more likely to be hospitalized (whether or not death resulted), compared with those taking a placebo.
The reason, say the researchers, is because although these medications relieve asthma symptoms, they also promote bronchial inflammation and sensitivity without warning.
Nevertheless, asthma death is relatively rare -- 15 patients in the meta-analysis who were taking the beta-agonists died, compared with three in the placebo group, over a six-month period.
"In total, there are about 5,000 deaths a year due to asthma, whether or not a person is taking a long-acting beta-agonist," said Edwin Salpeter, the J.G. White Distinguished Professor of Physical Sciences Emeritus at Cornell, who led the statistical analysis in the study. An eminent astrophysicist, Salpeter has more recently focused his attention on medical statistics. "We can show that overall it is statistically significant that, compared to patients taking a placebo, these long-acting beta-agonists kill a lot of people," he said.
"These asthma deaths are generally in healthy young adults," said his daughter, Shelley Salpeter, the lead author of the paper appearing online and in the June 20 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine. She is a clinical professor of medicine at Stanford's School of Medicine and a physician at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center in San Jose, Calif.
"We estimate that approximately 4,000 out of the 5,000 asthma deaths that occur in the U.S. each year are actually caused by these long-acting beta-agonists, and we urge that these agents be taken off the market," she added. Adding an anti-inflammatory drug to a long-acting beta-agonist adds little benefit, report the Salpeters. Advair, for example, (the fourth bestselling drug in the world with $5.6 billion in annual sales), combines salmeterol with an anti-inflammatory drug to provide some protection against bronchial inflammation associated with beta-agonists. But hospitalizations still doubled for patients inhaling a long-acting beta-agonist combined with an anti-inflammatory drug compared with asthma patients taking a placebo and an anti-inflammatory drug by itself. Of the 19 studies surveyed in the meta-analysis, the largest -- the Salmeterol Multicenter Asthma Research Trial with 26,000 participants -- reported a fourfold increased risk for asthma-related deaths and a twofold increase in life-threatening asthma events in patients using salmeterol. If older people who also suffered from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were removed from the analysis, the Salpeters report, salmeterol would be associated with a six times greater risk for asthma-related deaths.
The meta-analysis found that 53 of 3,083 patients inhaling beta-agonists were hospitalized for an asthma attack compared with 12 of 2,008 patients who received a placebo, meaning that there was one hospitalization for every 71 patients treated with a long-acting beta-agonist per year.
The Salpeters say that these two long-acting beta-agonists can result in death because tolerance to them develops over time.
"These agents can improve symptoms through bronchodilation at the same time as increasing underlying inflammation and bronchial hyper-responsiveness, thus worsening asthma control without any warning of increased symptoms," said Shelley Salpeter.
"It is particularly frightening that long-acting beta-agonists are detrimental, whether salmeterol or formoterol, whether taken alone or with anti-inflammatory drugs, both for children and for adults," said Ed Salpeter.
Co-authors of the study include Shelley Salpeter's son, Nicholas Buckley, a student at Sequoia High School in Redwood City, Calif., and Thomas Ormiston, a physician at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center in San Jose, Calif.
dave - 26 Aug 2006 14:02 GMT I tried to talk to the people at Glaxo when my father passed away, and they blew me off. Their own warnings come right out and tell you that this drug can kill. They have them burried deep in the literature, but it is there.
cindy - 30 Aug 2006 01:34 GMT Dave, I have just been diagnosed with asthma and my doctor gave me asmanex to try. Do you know anything about this drug? Have you read anything in the study that you were quoting? I am worried about taking it but don't know what other options I have. Thanks, Cindy
> "It is particularly frightening that long-acting beta-agonists are > detrimental, whether salmeterol or formoterol, whether taken alone or [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Thomas Ormiston, a physician at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center in > San Jose, Calif. 00doc - 30 Aug 2006 01:42 GMT > Dave, > I have just been diagnosed with asthma and my doctor gave me asmanex to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Thanks, > Cindy Asmanex does not share the concerns with Adavir.
 Signature 00doc
Sheri - 30 Aug 2006 12:02 GMT > Dave, > I have just been diagnosed with asthma and my doctor gave me asmanex to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Thanks, > Cindy I have been taking asmanex since it first came out... advair was not working for me anymore.... and my asthma has been doing very well... (I take sprirva in the morning ... along with flonase, in the evening I take the asmanex, along with singulair and more flonase)... with this regime I am down to maybe one major attack a month and only a few minor ones .. and most of the time now, my attacks are because of sudden weather changes, or me not doing what I'm suppose to do (breathing treatments before hiking..... not stopping when I know I've pushed to far).....
 Signature Sheri Shanks http://www.sassiebrat.com http://www.displayground.com
dave - 30 Aug 2006 16:27 GMT Hi Cindy I don't know about asmanex. I use Pulmicourt, and it works very well for me.
When my father passed away, I printed the warnings from Glaxo and posted quotes on this site. There were a small handful of holier than thou Dr's and others that bashed the dickens out of me. Now I dont' hear from them anymore. (Circe, Colin Campbell, CBI, ARoberts, drbob4prevent, 00doc ) It has become a well known fact that Advair is DANGEROUS. In fact, the wording in the warnings from Glaxo, about Advair have changed. I pulled them up just yesterday, and I couldn't find the wording that I had seen in the past. My issues were the statement in their old warnings: WARNING/CARDIOVASCULAR: "Advair can cause a change in the heart rhythm" I have it printed from a few years ago, but it isn't there anymore. They even go so far as to name a few "changed heart rhythms" but they don't mention any of the fatal rhythms. It makes me sick to think that they can get away with this!
Most folks have the issue with severe asthma attacks. Be well. Dave
> Dave, > I have just been diagnosed with asthma and my doctor gave me asmanex to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Thanks, > Cindy 00doc - 31 Aug 2006 03:39 GMT > Hi Cindy > I don't know about asmanex. I use Pulmicourt, and it works very well [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > hear from them anymore. > (Circe, Colin Campbell, CBI, ARoberts, drbob4prevent, 00doc ) You present a fanatical view and fly off the handle at anyone who suggestes the drug might not be completely and totally evil. Please don't confuse the fact that the more balanced minds here for the most part leave you alone with vindicating your past behavior or some admonission of guilt.
 Signature 00doc
NorthShoreCEO - 31 Aug 2006 13:04 GMT CBI, a practicing MD, still posts here, as you can see. ARoberts, not an MD, also still posts here. Colin Campbell, not an MD but serving our country, has not posted here in some time. drbob4prevent and Circe, who may or may not be MD's or DO's, either haven't posted in the four years I've been lurking and posting here, or have posted so infrequently that I don't remember them.
> Hi Cindy > I don't know about asmanex. I use Pulmicourt, and it works [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > Be well. > Dave TRN - 01 Sep 2006 01:50 GMT Did you post this study?
http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/June06/AsthmaDeaths.kr.html
00doc - 01 Sep 2006 19:03 GMT > Did you post this study? > > http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/June06/AsthmaDeaths.kr.html Yes - that is a news summary of the "Saltpeter" meta-analysis that was discussed when it first came out and several times since. I believe Dave has posted it in one way or another several times. As Dr. Duval pointed out it is basically dominated by the SMART staudy (which has also been discussed here several times) which is not a bad study per se but leaves a lot of questions open. As he says, meta-analyses are only as good as thew studies that go into them. Sometimes they can be misleading (mostly if they mix apples and organces) and sometimes they can shed new light (if flaws in different studies wash each other out). Usually they are good when they take several similar studies and combine them to end up having more power to make fine distinctions. In cases where they are so diminated by one study they add little to that one study. So this should not be taken as new news as much as the media is protraying it.
 Signature 00doc
TRN - 01 Sep 2006 21:39 GMT > Yes - that is a news summary of the "Saltpeter" meta-analysis that was > discussed when it first came out and several times since. I believe Dave has [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > add little to that one study. So this should not be taken as new news as > much as the media is protraying it. Thanks I was out for awhile, computerless. Will Google the group for that study. I don't believe that the figure could be that high. Long before Advair came out the national death rate was 5000, wasn't it?
Joy
00doc - 02 Sep 2006 17:26 GMT > Thanks I was out for awhile, computerless. Will Google the group for that > study. I don't believe that the figure could be that high. Long before > Advair came out the national death rate was 5000, wasn't it? Asthma incidence, severity, and death rates have been increasing since at least 1980 (in the US). Serevent was approved by the FDA (for use in the US) in 1994. I don't see any evidence that the curves changed either way with the advent of Advair.
http://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5101a1.htm
 Signature 00doc
dave - 05 Sep 2006 14:05 GMT From: 00doc - view profile Date: Sat, Sep 2 2006 9:26 am Email: "00doc" <0...@comcast.net> Groups: alt.support.asthma
I don't see any evidence that the curves changed either way with the advent of Advair.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I am not surprised at your comment. "I DON'T SEE ANY EVIDENCE..." You need to stop being like GW Bush and admit that you are wrong. You actually don't seem to care. Wasn't it your comment ------>
From: 00doc - view profile Date: Tues, Jan 10 2006 8:05 pm Email: "00doc" <0...@comcast.net> Groups: alt.support.asthma " except for those pesky few people that had heart attacks while taking it...."
http://www.webmd.com/content/Article/119/113391.htm http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/05/AR2006060501126.html http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/17/eveningnews/main589058.shtml http://www.drkoop.com/druglibrary/93/advair_diskus-warnings_precautions.html http://www.fda.gov/CDER/drug/InfoSheets/HCP/fluticasoneHCP.htm http://www.adrugrecall.com/advair/advair.html http://www.yourlawyer.com/topics/overview/advair http://www.weitzlux.com/advair/death_402813.html
TRN - 05 Sep 2006 18:04 GMT > From: 00doc - view profile > Date: Sat, Sep 2 2006 9:26 am [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I don't see any evidence that the curves changed either way with > the advent of Advair. From the Cornell article I asked about earlier.
"We estimate that approximately 4,000 out of the 5,000 asthma deaths that occur in the U.S. each year are actually caused by these long-acting beta-agonists, and we urge that these agents be taken off the market," she added. {Shelley Salpeter, the lead author of the paper appearing online and in the June 20 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine. She is a clinical professor of medicine at Stanford's School of Medicine and a physician at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center in San Jose, Calif.}
Yes, exactly - no change. The article stated that 4 out of 5 deaths was due to Advair/Serevent. That Statement will be hard to prove in light of the stats which were collected before and after the advent of the drug.
00doc - 08 Sep 2006 03:05 GMT > Yes, exactly - no change. The article stated that 4 out of 5 deaths was > due > to Advair/Serevent. That Statement will be hard to prove in light of the > stats which were collected before and after the advent of the drug. Yep. I think long acting agonists probably do contribute to death in some patients. However, the 80% figure is nearly impossible. The asthma deaths from other causes would have had to drop substantially as the drugs were being phased in to not produce a blip in the deaths.
 Signature 00doc
aroberts - 06 Sep 2006 01:11 GMT Just curious: Have you (or anyone in your family) sued Glaxo for the death of your father? If so, what was the outcome?
> From: 00doc - view profile > Date: Sat, Sep 2 2006 9:26 am [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > http://www.yourlawyer.com/topics/overview/advair > http://www.weitzlux.com/advair/death_402813.html dave - 06 Sep 2006 15:56 GMT > Just curious: Have you (or anyone in your family) sued Glaxo for the death > of your father? If so, what was the outcome? I tried to talk to the folks at Glaxo. The first lady that answered the phone seemed like she had a heart and really cared. From that point on, no one would give me the time of day. Not even a returned phone call. That is when I started contacting lawyers. Glaxo is huge, and I couldn't find anyone with the balls to take them on. Since I can't take them on in the courts, I will make it my goal to educate the public with Glaxo's own literature. I don't make this stuff up, all I do is make sure that as many people as I can reach are educated.
Glaxo knows how to shut me up. All they have to do is call me.
My email is dave1 at juno dot com (spam prevention) Are you out there GLAXO?
Lets talk.
NorthShoreCEO - 06 Sep 2006 17:25 GMT Usually, with something of this magnitude, there are class action lawsuits. You might want to see if one is currently out there.
>> Just curious: Have you (or anyone in your family) sued Glaxo >> for the death [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Lets talk. aroberts - 07 Sep 2006 02:34 GMT >> Just curious: Have you (or anyone in your family) sued Glaxo for the >> death [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Lets talk. Apparently some lawyers are...
I typed in "advair danger" in Google and got this, among others:
http://www.onlinelawyersource.com/serevent/dangers.html
The search terms advair "class action" yielded:
http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/case/serevent
http://www.classaction-lawsuit.com/lawsuit_info/serevent.php
There are many more under those search terms if you're serious about it.
miles - 07 Sep 2006 04:31 GMT > I am not surprised at your comment. "I DON'T SEE ANY EVIDENCE..." > You need to stop being like GW Bush and admit that you are wrong. Oh geez. Have to get in your political views to something totally unrelated. Good grief.
dave - 07 Sep 2006 16:25 GMT You are right. That was un called for. My apologies. Dave
dave wrote:
> I am not surprised at your comment. "I DON'T SEE ANY EVIDENCE..." > You need to stop being like GW Bush and admit that you are wrong. Oh geez. Have to get in your political views to something totally unrelated. Good grief.
00doc - 08 Sep 2006 02:04 GMT > From: 00doc - view profile > Date: Sat, Sep 2 2006 9:26 am [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > You need to stop being like GW Bush and admit that you are wrong. You > actually don't seem to care. Wasn't it your comment ------> OK - if I am wrong show me where the curves changed with the intriduction of Advair.
> From: 00doc - view profile > Date: Tues, Jan 10 2006 8:05 pm > Email: "00doc" <0...@comcast.net> > Groups: alt.support.asthma > " except for those pesky few people that had > heart attacks while taking it...." That was a sarcastic comment that you have taken out of context. If you would post the link to where I said that it would be clear to anyone (else) who reads it that I was not discounting the people who have side effects. My point was exactly the opposite.
 Signature 00doc
TRN - 08 Sep 2006 02:51 GMT > OK - if I am wrong show me where the curves changed with the intriduction of > Advair.
> > Groups: alt.support.asthma > > " except for those pesky few people that had [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > who reads it that I was not discounting the people who have side effects. My > point was exactly the opposite. I think the problem you are having with Dave is "apples and oranges". The article is talking about deaths caused by Advair via asthma attacks and the CDC survey does put the validity of the Cornell piece in jeapordy if you ask me.
Dave is talking about Advair causing Heart attacks. In that event, the CDC survey is worthless at providing information because the cause of death would not be asthma attack, but a heart attack. I don't know that any stats exist for how many die from heart attacks who are taking Advair. Going to be really hard to prove IMHO. But there are always lawyers out there willing to try.
Joy
00doc - 08 Sep 2006 03:03 GMT >> OK - if I am wrong show me where the curves changed with the intriduction > of [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > to > try. It's even worse than that. If a patient is found dead at home there is rarely an autopsy done. If it looks like a natural death the police will usually call the person's doc and ask him if he would be willing to sign the death certificate. The doc then makes best guess about the cause of death - usually with no other info than that the guy died. . If the guy is a known severe asthmatic and there is reason to think he had an attack (like the family says he was or he is found with his inhalers close by) then the doc will put down that he died of asthma. If he is older and known to have heart disease or risk factors for heart disease then the will put down that it was a heart attack.
You are right though - if Dave's dad died of a heart atttack and not asthma then he will have a very hard time proving cause. Really the known increased risk of death with Advair is from asthma.
Note to Dave: I did not say that Advair didn't kill your dad. Just that you would have a hard time proving it. There is a difference.
 Signature 00doc
dave - 19 Sep 2006 00:27 GMT My father did not have a heart attack. There were no cardiac enzymes. He died from an arrythmia. "A change in the heart rhythm" just as Glaxo warned about.
I have personally been on quite a few medical emergencies where the people were in cardiac arrest, and Advair was one of their meds. Coincidence? Maybe so.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` From: 00doc - view profile It's even worse than that. If a patient is found dead at home there is rarely an autopsy done. If it looks like a natural death the police will usually call the person's doc and ask him if he would be willing to sign the death certificate. The doc then makes best guess about the cause of death - usually with no other info than that the guy died. . If the guy is a known severe asthmatic and there is reason to think he had an attack (like the family says he was or he is found with his inhalers close by) then the doc will put down that he died of asthma. If he is older and known to have heart disease or risk factors for heart disease then the will put down that it was a heart attack.
You are right though - if Dave's dad died of a heart atttack and not asthma then he will have a very hard time proving cause. Really the known increased risk of death with Advair is from asthma.
aroberts - 19 Sep 2006 01:43 GMT > My father did not have a heart attack. There were no cardiac enzymes. > He died from an arrythmia. "A change in the heart rhythm" just as [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > people were in cardiac arrest, and Advair was one of their meds. > Coincidence? Maybe so. Were you able to use the links to potential class-actions?
dave - 19 Sep 2006 02:51 GMT I actually had a lawyer contact me. Don't know where we will go with this right now. thx.
> > My father did not have a heart attack. There were no cardiac enzymes. > > He died from an arrythmia. "A change in the heart rhythm" just as [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Were you able to use the links to potential class-actions? dave - 19 Sep 2006 00:27 GMT My father did not have a heart attack. There were no cardiac enzymes. He died from an arrythmia. "A change in the heart rhythm" just as Glaxo warned about.
I have personally been on quite a few medical emergencies where the people were in cardiac arrest, and Advair was one of their meds. Coincidence? Maybe so.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` From: 00doc - view profile It's even worse than that. If a patient is found dead at home there is rarely an autopsy done. If it looks like a natural death the police will usually call the person's doc and ask him if he would be willing to sign the death certificate. The doc then makes best guess about the cause of death - usually with no other info than that the guy died. . If the guy is a known severe asthmatic and there is reason to think he had an attack (like the family says he was or he is found with his inhalers close by) then the doc will put down that he died of asthma. If he is older and known to have heart disease or risk factors for heart disease then the will put down that it was a heart attack.
You are right though - if Dave's dad died of a heart atttack and not asthma then he will have a very hard time proving cause. Really the known increased risk of death with Advair is from asthma.
00doc - 20 Sep 2006 21:52 GMT > From: 00doc - view profile > > You are right though - if Dave's dad died of a heart atttack and not > asthma then he will have a very hard time proving cause. Really the known > increased risk of death with Advair is from asthma.
> My father did not have a heart attack. There were no cardiac enzymes. > He died from an arrythmia. "A change in the heart rhythm" just as > Glaxo warned about. That is why I said "if". Someone else made the claim and I was trying to comment without just assuming it was true.
I still think you will have a hard time making a case since it was not an asthma death which is the main risk with Advair. But that is something for you and your lawyer to hash out.
> I have personally been on quite a few medical emergencies where the > people were in cardiac arrest, and Advair was one of their meds. > Coincidence? Maybe so. It is a commonly prescibed med, especially for people who have severe respiratory diseases. Those same people also have arrests. So I don't think either one of us has any idea how much of a cooincidence it is. I can tell you that even if we take the Saltpeter's opinion as completely true, that there are about 4000 deaths per year attributable to salmeterol, that this number is a small percentage of the total number of deaths per year (something like 4 million). Therefore to have seen a lot of arrests where the people were on salmeterol you either have seen a lot of arrests (like thousands) or, yes, it is a cooincidence.
 Signature 00doc
TRN - 21 Sep 2006 15:09 GMT ">
> I still think you will have a hard time making a case since it was not an > asthma death which is the main risk with Advair. But that is something for [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > the people were on salmeterol you either have seen a lot of arrests (like > thousands) or, yes, it is a cooincidence. I saw a Doctor at Emory this week who stated Advair related deaths only happen in children. Just to further confuse the issue, I thought I'd throw that in. Joy
dave - 21 Sep 2006 17:04 GMT > I saw a Doctor at Emory this week who stated Advair related deaths only > happen in children. Just to further confuse the issue, I thought I'd throw > that in. > Joy Which further strengthens the arguement that Dr.'s don't know everything, even tho most think that they do.
Glaxo and the FDA have told us otherwise.
You might consider firing that Dr. and hire a new one. After all, they do work for you.
TRN - 21 Sep 2006 21:53 GMT > Which further strengthens the arguement that Dr.'s don't know > everything, even tho most think that they do. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You might consider firing that Dr. and hire a new one. After all, they > do work for you. Oh, I don't know about that. It was the first time I saw a bunch of Doctors treating someone like they were a God. I think he must be pretty good and I did get enrolled in an NIH study.
Joy
00doc - 23 Sep 2006 04:08 GMT > I saw a Doctor at Emory this week who stated Advair related deaths only > happen in children. Just to further confuse the issue, I thought I'd throw > that in. The SMART study was in kids.
The Saltpeter meta-analysis used other studies that included adults so I am sure they would claim their study shows that that isn't true. However, the SMART trial was large enough to completely dominate the analysis. The result is that it is not clear what conclusions can be drawn outside of that one study (which was in kids).
The point I was trying to make was just the unlikeliness of Dave's claim (to have witnessed "quite a few" arrests where the person was on Advair).
There are about 4 million deaths per year in the US.
The Saltpeters estimate that there are 4000 asthma deaths per year related to long acting bronchodilators. Almost every one considers that to be a high end estimate. Since there are only 5000 asthma related deaths per year total it certainly can't be much higher.
That means that at absolute most 1 in 1000 deaths are from Advair.
Dave claims to have witnessed "quite a few" of these.
Therefore: Dave has either witnessed "quite a few thousand arrests" or he has had an extraordinarily unlikely sample. If we assume that "quite a few" is at least three that equates to 3000 arrests which works out to one each and every day for almost a decade.
 Signature 00doc
dave - 22 Sep 2006 02:54 GMT It is a commonly prescibed med, especially for people who have severe respiratory diseases. Those same people also have arrests. So I don't think either one of us has any idea how much of a cooincidence it is. I can tell you that even if we take the Saltpeter's opinion as completely true, that there are about 4000 deaths per year attributable to salmeterol, that this number is a small percentage of the total number of deaths per year (something like 4 million). Therefore to have seen a lot of arrests where the people were on salmeterol you either have seen a lot of arrests (like thousands) or, yes, it is a cooincidence.
-- 00doc
That has to be one of the dumbest things that you have ever said.
I run 3-4 full arrest a week on average, and I have been doing this since 1986, so yes I have seen a lot, but not the "thousands" that you just pulled out of your butt. moron
00doc - 23 Sep 2006 04:17 GMT > It is a commonly prescibed med, especially for people who have severe > respiratory diseases. Those same people also have arrests. So I don't [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > since 1986, so yes I have seen a lot, but not the "thousands" that you > just pulled out of your butt. moron OK - 3.5 arrests 50 weeks per year since 2000 (the year Advair was approved) is about 1000 arrests. Therefore if you have seen it more than once you have you have had an unusual experience. When you consider that you might not be aware of all the meds people take, that some people might be taking a long acting dilator other than salmeterol, that the 1:1000 estimate is by all acounts high, and that the popularity of Advair was not as great in the first few years (and so it would be responsible for much less than the surrent rate of deaths) it is all the less likely that you would see it more than once.
I've explained exactly where I get my numbers. You would be more convinving if you would tell us why you don't believe them than if you just call me more names.
 Signature 00doc
dave - 23 Sep 2006 18:09 GMT You and I both know that there is no convincing you. You take the title of arrogance to the extreme. You claim to be a dr, and as one you have most likely prescribed Advair. As a result you will go to the ends of the earth to support your actions without ever admiting that there is a possibility that you may have given someone something that has resulted in their death. Glaxo admits this can happen as well as the FDA. Who do you think you are to stand on your soap box and put me down everytime I relay a warning. You are human and prone to mistakes, even tho you can't admit it. Thus the problem with most Dr's. How many people die as a result of mistakes by medical professionals? A butt load!
You would be more convinving
> if you would tell us why you don't believe them than if you just call me > more names. 00doc - 23 Sep 2006 21:02 GMT > You and I both know that there is no convincing you. You take the > title of arrogance to the extreme. You claim to be a dr, and as one [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > admit it. Thus the problem with most Dr's. How many people die as a > result of mistakes by medical professionals? A butt load! Once again you resort to name calling and as hominem attacks rather than just tellingme exactly why you think I am wrong.
The joke is that in your basic premise I actually agree with you. You just take it too far. So to deserve these diatribes I have not called you wrong or taken an oposite stance. I have simply not been extreme enough for you.
I'd hate to see what kind of tantrum you would display if I actually said you were wrong.
 Signature 00doc
pavane - 23 Sep 2006 22:11 GMT > ...Thus the problem with most Dr's. How many people die as a > result of mistakes by medical professionals? A butt load! Far fewer than there would be if they didn't go to the medical professionals in the first place. You know that is true.
pavane
dave - 25 Sep 2006 16:45 GMT Far fewer than there would be if they didn't go to the
> medical professionals in the first place. You know > that is true. > > pavane That doesn't make incompetence OK.
Neil Duval - 30 Aug 2006 12:06 GMT > Three common asthma inhalers containing the drugs salmeterol or > formoterol may be causing four out of five U.S. asthma-related deaths [quoted text clipped - 78 lines] > Thomas Ormiston, a physician at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center in > San Jose, Calif. These concerns were raised after a particular study called the SMART trial. For many years there have been studies linking shorter acting bronchodilators with asthma deaths. In large part these were dismissed as merely showing that asthmatics who used more asthma medication were likely more ill to begin with and therefore more likely to die.
The original research on advair showed that adding a long acting beta agonist to an inhaled steroid resulted in superior asthma control regardless of how it was measured. Airflow measurements, quality of life, exacerbations etc, all improved. The SMART trial (which by the way was a TERRIBLY designed trial) did not tease out which asthmatics used salmeterol alone from those that used the combination product advair which contained both salmeterol and flovent. Since increased deaths occurred with salmeterol, and since salmeterol is a component of advair, then the FDA blamed both drugs.
Interestingly the meta-analysis that came out later relied HEAVILY on the SMART data which itself was flawed. A meta-analysis is only as good as the data it contains.
The best take on all this I've seen yet came in the editorial that accomjpanied the Salpeter meta-analysis. Here the author stated that perhaps we don't know the whold story. He goes on to say that we should not be getting rid of these long acting bronchodilators but perhaps should be more careful in who we prescribe them to and be certain that the asthmatics using them also have an inhaled steroid.
As a board certified pulmonologist for many years I would encourage patients to not reject the long acting bronchodilators out of hand. They certainly have their place in the treatment of asthma
aroberts - 31 Aug 2006 02:20 GMT > These concerns were raised after a particular study called the SMART > trial. For many years there have been studies linking shorter acting [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > patients to not reject the long acting bronchodilators out of hand. They > certainly have their place in the treatment of asthma Thanks for your well-reasoned reply. I had looked at the SMART trial and decided that it was badly skewed because of poor design. The Salpeter meta-analysis perpetuates that ill-reasoned study. As you say, properly and selectively applied, Advair can be very beneficial.
00doc - 31 Aug 2006 03:49 GMT > Thanks for your well-reasoned reply. I had looked at the SMART trial and > decided that it was badly skewed because of poor design. The Salpeter > meta-analysis perpetuates that ill-reasoned study. As you say, properly > and selectively applied, Advair can be very beneficial. I forget the details but when the study first came out I read some articles suggesting the the Saltpeter family had some grudge and were less then unbiased.
 Signature 00doc
Ruth - 31 Aug 2006 04:00 GMT I know this has probably been discussed before, but I am a new reader..... I developed asthma in my 20s (now 51) and its progressively getting worse - there is a lot of family with asthma too. The best preventative for me seems to be 400-800 Pulmicort - I vary it as I need to, and use Bricanyl as well. Every time I get a cold or flu I end up on antibiotics and prednisone. Reading about the theories behind buteyko - it all makes sense logically, but has anyone tried it, and whats the general opinion?
Thanks Ruth
NorthShoreCEO - 31 Aug 2006 13:19 GMT There are some studies that indicate breathing exercises/Buteyko, can improve breathing, resulting in a slight reduction of inhaler use in those with more mild cases of asthma. The business of Buteyko is quite cultish, and those who have something to gain by exagerating the value of Buteyko not only do so, but have been vicious toward those who either don't agree with their wild assertions, or prefer studies done by those who don't have a vested interested in the profit of Buteyko.
If you don't have a reason that your asthma is getting worse, such as smoking, pollution or subjecting yourself to things you're allergic to, then it's possible you have bacteria residing in the tissue of your lungs following an illness (cold, flu, bronchitis or pneumonia), which could be making your asthma worse. In some people it's the cause of asthma, and once the bacteria is eradicated, the asthma is resolved. You'll find studies at www.asthmastory.com to support this.
However, it's possible you've developed allergies you're unaware of, or have a thyroid problem. I'd be tested for both, because allergies can exacerbate asthma, and I know people who had asthma that was worsened by, or brought on by, untreated thyroid problems.
Also, you could now have some other condition (copd or emphysema, for example). What does your doctor say? If he's ruled those out, I'd be tested for allergies and thyroid first, followed by the possibility that bacteria is making your asthma worse. Unfortunately, there are no conclusive tests for the third possibility, so you may have to convince your doctor to just treat you. You can get more help in that regard in the support forum at asthmastory.com.
> I know this has probably been discussed before, but I am a new > reader..... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Thanks > Ruth NorthShoreCEO - 31 Aug 2006 13:21 GMT > or prefer studies done by those who don't have a vested > interested in the profit of Buteyko. Oh duh me. I meant vested interest.
00doc - 01 Sep 2006 19:10 GMT > I know this has probably been discussed before, but I am a new reader..... > I developed asthma in my 20s (now 51) and its progressively getting [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Reading about the theories behind [B] - it all makes sense logically, but > has anyone tried it, and whats the general opinion? It is basically a relaxation technique that can help you muddle through some minor exacerbations without taking medications. The theory behind it (chronic "overbreathing" and a low CO2 state) is nonsense and studies that they claim support it are generally missrepresented (often actually discussing a completely different but similarly named condition). The clinical studies on it are generally few, done by supporters, methodologically poor (sometimes to the point of being fraudulent) and - again - misrepresented by supporters. Some of them show reduction in rescue inhaler use but no improvement in any objective measure.
I would say that it would be cheaper and more beneficial to your over-all health to take a yoga class.
 Signature 00doc
00doc - 31 Aug 2006 03:47 GMT > The best take on all this I've seen yet came in the editorial that > accomjpanied the Salpeter meta-analysis. Here the author stated that [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > patients to not reject the long acting bronchodilators out of hand. They > certainly have their place in the treatment of asthma Better watch out. You are being holier than thou.
I expressed concern here over the chronic beta receptor stimulation of salmeterol when it was first released and questioned how it differed from the frowned upon (yet ocassionally useful) strategy of qid "standing dose" albuterol.
Despite these early and consistantly expressed concerns when I suggested to Dave that these meds could have a benefit for some patients and should be used judiciously rather than completely removed from the market he blasted me with personal insults and suggested that I was a drug company shill.
His father died while taking Advair and he blames the death completely and totally on the drug. This was years ago but he still cannot let go of his crusade against it. Most of us here have just taken pitty on him and deciced to let his occasional rant about it go unchallenged.
BTW - welcome. It is nice to have another voice of reason.
 Signature 00doc
|
|
|