First reaction: who comes up with these crazy unpronounceable un-remember-able names for these drugs? Geeze.
Their drug is administered subcutaneously according to first quote below, so it would be possible for people to self-inject, as with insulin for diabetics. However lots of people are afraid of needles, so I assume it would mean doctor's office visits for injections.
The second quote posted below indicates that this seems to be a once-every-two-weeks dosing, and they kept people on it for over a year.
So my conclusion is: Lilly's drug, unpronounceable, is much better than Enbrel and also much safer. It appears to require continuous injection over time.
My utterly unproven theory is that we group auto-immune diseases by symptoms into one category -- for instance, psoriasis -- but that disease may actually be triggered by several different causes. Therefore, certain drugs may work better on patients with one cause, and other drugs work better for patients with a different cause. (Or in the case of certain cancers, genetic differences among the patients -- we know this to be true.)
So:
IF, and it's a big if, Prurisol is effective and acts as it did in the animal studies, it would be preferable in because the number of doses would be less, and it shouldn't require maintenance doses every two weeks like the Lilly drug does.
The Lilly drug is being tested on moderate to severe psoriasis, and Prurisol is being tested on mild to moderate. So, it could be that Prurisol (IF IT WORKS) becomes the first-line treatment because of the (WE PRESUME) fewer doses needed for efficacy and maintenance. And, if P fails, then patients try the Lilly drug.
ALL speculation, of course. But there is plenty of room for many different treatments of a disease that affects so many people. Having options for patients who may respond better to one drug than another is a good thing, so I hope Lilly's drug works.... and that Prurisol works better. at least for mild-to-moderate stage patients.
Here's info on the phase 2 trial, from last year:
Their drug is administered subcutaneously according to first quote below, so it would be possible for people to self-inject, as with insulin for diabetics. However lots of people are afraid of needles, so I assume it would mean doctor's office visits for injections.
The second quote posted below indicates that this seems to be a once-every-two-weeks dosing, and they kept people on it for over a year.
So my conclusion is: Lilly's drug, unpronounceable, is much better than Enbrel and also much safer. It appears to require continuous injection over time.
My utterly unproven theory is that we group auto-immune diseases by symptoms into one category -- for instance, psoriasis -- but that disease may actually be triggered by several different causes. Therefore, certain drugs may work better on patients with one cause, and other drugs work better for patients with a different cause. (Or in the case of certain cancers, genetic differences among the patients -- we know this to be true.)
So:
IF, and it's a big if, Prurisol is effective and acts as it did in the animal studies, it would be preferable in because the number of doses would be less, and it shouldn't require maintenance doses every two weeks like the Lilly drug does.
The Lilly drug is being tested on moderate to severe psoriasis, and Prurisol is being tested on mild to moderate. So, it could be that Prurisol (IF IT WORKS) becomes the first-line treatment because of the (WE PRESUME) fewer doses needed for efficacy and maintenance. And, if P fails, then patients try the Lilly drug.
ALL speculation, of course. But there is plenty of room for many different treatments of a disease that affects so many people. Having options for patients who may respond better to one drug than another is a good thing, so I hope Lilly's drug works.... and that Prurisol works better. at least for mild-to-moderate stage patients.
Quote:
xekizumab, a humanized IgG4 monoclonal antibody administered by subcutaneous injection....
No serious adverse events occurred during the study, and the most common reported adverse events, similar to brodalumab, were nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory infection, injection site reactions and headaches. Asymptomatic, grade 2 neutropenia (i.e., 1000 to 1500 cells per cubic millimeter) occurred in two subjects on ixekizumab.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/809459_5
Here's info on the phase 2 trial, from last year:
Quote:According to Eli Lilly's statement, 78-90 percent of the patients taking ixekizumab experienced at least a 75 percent improvement in their psoriasis after twelve weeks, as measured by the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75). Of these patients, 31-41 percent achieved 100 percent improvement (PASI 100) after twelve weeks, which is clear skin.
In comparison, only 5-7 percent of patients taking Enbrel achieved PASI 100, the statement reports.UNCOVER, the study testing ixekizumab against a placebo only, kept patients on the drug for 60 weeks. Throughout the entire study period, patients maintained "high levels of response," according to the press release.
The most common side effects for ixekizumab were colds and infections around the site of the injection, and in the trials comparing ixekizumab with Enbrel, the frequency and severity of side effects were similar for the two drugs, according to the release.
https://www.psoriasis.org/advance/new-psorias...f-patients
2
