In the psychopharmacologic field there are a lot of pretended new
drugs strongly plugged by Drug Companies and Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs).
Escitalopram (patented) is effectively better than citalopram
(unpatented)? Paliperidon (patented) is really more efficacious and well
tolerated than risperidon (unpatented)? Are they better with advantage of
patients and National Health Service(NHS) or in the only shareholders'
interest?
The plain truth is that this and other "new" drugs have similar
clinical performance within a pharmacological class; they are only "me-
too" drugs; but they improve the drug companies' performance. How many
KLOs exalt pseudo-new drugs without to criticize the me-too drugs?
Sad to
say, the once clear boundary between academic medicine and industry has
increasingly become blurred. There are associated ethical and economic
problems including: 1)higher pharmaceutical costs; 2)non rational
prescribing; 3)waste of NHS funds to exploit otherwise for valid relief
patterns; 4)limited development of alternative, independent sources of
continuing education, of information, of evidence based clinical control.
While it's unwise to advocate a total separation of the academic and
clinical community from the industry, more careful transparency is asked
for this complicated relationship. It's necessary to remodel intelligible
bounds between commercial-industrial and therapeutic-professional aspects
of Medicine, to safeguard the Profession and the Patients.
Rapid Response:
The shadow line
In the psychopharmacologic field there are a lot of pretended new drugs strongly plugged by Drug Companies and Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs). Escitalopram (patented) is effectively better than citalopram (unpatented)? Paliperidon (patented) is really more efficacious and well tolerated than risperidon (unpatented)? Are they better with advantage of patients and National Health Service(NHS) or in the only shareholders' interest?
The plain truth is that this and other "new" drugs have similar clinical performance within a pharmacological class; they are only "me- too" drugs; but they improve the drug companies' performance. How many KLOs exalt pseudo-new drugs without to criticize the me-too drugs?
Sad to say, the once clear boundary between academic medicine and industry has increasingly become blurred. There are associated ethical and economic problems including: 1)higher pharmaceutical costs; 2)non rational prescribing; 3)waste of NHS funds to exploit otherwise for valid relief patterns; 4)limited development of alternative, independent sources of continuing education, of information, of evidence based clinical control.
While it's unwise to advocate a total separation of the academic and clinical community from the industry, more careful transparency is asked for this complicated relationship. It's necessary to remodel intelligible bounds between commercial-industrial and therapeutic-professional aspects of Medicine, to safeguard the Profession and the Patients.
Competing interests: None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests