Amarin Corp PLC (AMRN) Share Price

Pubmed 2014 Retrospective Study

Conclusions: Serum EPA concentration is associated with cognitive function in patients with CAD, suggesting that a low serum EPA level is a risk factor for cognitive impairment independent of cardiac function

* After being screwed over by a skinny patent nobody will be running a 10 year $50 million trial to look at the suspected benefits of Vascepa outside of MACE benefits.

https://x.com/GeoWizz_/status/1882105823335461213

VASCEPA® has been shown to significantly REDUCE CVE’s on top of statins regardless of LDL-c levels
(https://www.jacc.org/doi/full/10.1016/S0735-1097%2824%2903673-8).

Could this Risk Reduction (-25%) be added to other LLT’s? Second Question: Is LDL-c the end of the story?

Disclaimer: I am not a doctor or medical professional. The information shared on this platform is for informational purposes only and is not intended as a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have read on this platform.

$0.57 provided quite a bit of resistance in the fall. Breaking through this, and getting above, say $0.60, would be great.

Centerwell Pharmacy (mail order), is now sending me the larger 120 capsules containers instead of the repackaged 45 capsule containers.
So, can someone elucidate as to why on Captains slides why Bempedoic Acid + Ezetimibe are being prescribed over Vascepa? Apologies if this has been hashed about before.

Statins and dementia becoming besties the past 24 hours

Ha ha ...clever ... believe its white meat ...favored by Maoris and Fijians in the late 1800's

It's a rough translation of the term for human meat used in some Polynesian cultures that practised cannibalism in the past. A cooked white human presumably resembling an elongated pig, which have pink/white meat.

Kiwi

All Amarin has to say is... Vascepa beat Gall Stones (Chinese Black Market) remedy in a head to head trial. 

I'm surprised Kiwi that you just went with the headline and didn't go one level down...... 'processed meats" is not what health conscience people go for. Also take a look at the details of the study and you'll see how flawed and meaningless it truly was.

Kiwi, How is long pig classified? Is that red or white meat?
Sleven,

For all U red meat lovers

Higher red meat intake increases risk for cognitive decline, dementia


Individuals who ate more processed red meat had a higher risk for dementia and cognitive decline.
Replacing processed red meat with nuts and legumes had benefits for cognitive health.
Higher consumption of red meat, including processed red meat, was associated with a higher risk for cognitive decline and dementia, according to research published in Neurology.

“Dietary guidelines tend to focus on reducing risks of chronic conditions like heart disease and diabetes, while cognitive health is less frequently discussed, despite being linked to these diseases,” study author Daniel Wang, MD, ScD, from the Channing Division of Network Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, said in a release related to the study.


Kiwi

Great link, should hit the European market with the data
2100 patients
38% reduction in the rate of MACE in IPE cohort as compared to OM-3.
.
Blows that mineral oil short attack out of the water. Haven't been keeping up and this is huge news for the doubting practitioners that have are releasing a statin patient from the hospital that has just had a HA. Hundreds of thousands of patients a year are obvious candidates for the additional protection Vazkepa offers. The drug is even more effective at preventing a second HA than the first episode.

Another great graphic cap'n :^)

Hello my Friends. The UK Script Numbers are in for November 2024. Use the link below to view and/or download my Summary Report:

Slide # 1: Monthly comparison of VAZKEPA® vs. 3 Comparator Products from Jan 2022 to Nov. 2024
Slide # 2: Same as Slide # 1 except only comparing VAZKEPA® and Omacor (OMG-3 FA).
Slide # 3: A 100% “Stacked” bar chart visualizing Market Share between VAZKEPA® and Omacor.
Slide #4: Monthly & FY projections for VAZKEPA® Revenue based on average Reimbursement Prices.
Enjoy!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Fw5xKjZgpTyRciakwoe0-ej2fJcADgZ7/view?usp=sharing

, it could very well be that some in the study were on GV.....uh oh ...now your've done it ....tar and feathers for U mate .

Kiwi

Snd. Yes you are correct . Kaiser replaced my brand Vascepa with Teva's generic about a year ago . The 5 yrs roughly before that was all brand Vascepa ...and before that mostly OmegaVia EPA 500.
Apologies for my slip .
I do agree with JR's opinion that the study at least directionally supports the R-IT results . But the O3 used ( EPA/DHA ) is not inert and likely to cause an increase in LDL so raises risk of a CV event ...therefore the study doesnt help identify true risk reduction using Vascepa .

Kiwi

Actually, the study we have been discussing here catalogued or measured patients on IPE vs those on O-3. Although most would be on Medicare or have Vascepa covered, it could very well be that some in the study were on GV.

https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/S0735-1097%2824%2903313-8

Just to make it clear, you are NOT taking Vascepa. Instead you are taking the generic crap, since kaiser stopped giving you vascepa. You have confirmed this multiple times on this board. Is it not the case any more? If you are taking the generic crap and telling you are taking vascepa, that’s egregious and shameful at the least.

He's clear on his audience ;-O

Kiwi, and even if that's the case, it still speaks to the efficacy of EPA vs. DHA, and some of the open questions that doctors have about Omega-3's for CVD, and is even more supportive of REDUCE-It.

So yeah, maybe DHA was deleterious to outcomes. More explanation for doctors as to why REDUCE-It/JELIS/RESPECT was effective, and STRENGTH (and others) were not.

Higher LDL cholesterol levels are associated with an increased risk of MACE.
For every 39 mg/dL lower achieved LDL-C, the risk of MACE appears to be 24% lower2.

So if their EPA/DHA product raised their LDL cholesterol levels by 39 mg/dl ....it increased their risk of MACE by 24%
DHA raises LDL cholesterol

Kiwi

JR. If this was a RWE against SOC ( Standard of care ) I would consider it far more supportive of R-IT results .... even if the RRR was half as much .
But to say they had a 38% risk reduction after only 9 mths follow up ....says very little about the true RRR of Vascepa ....and probably more about the dangers of EPA/DHA in this population.
JMO
Kiwi

Mean age was ~70 years with ~97% male and ~86% white race.

Maybe this study shows the VA should stop prescribing EPA/DHA products to 70 yr old white males in the VA ....it's may be killing a lot of them .
Kiwi

Capt. One of the reasons I stick to taking Vascepa each day ...is your " Its the EPA stupid " posts ...so keep on doing your thing

Re the 38% RRR in a head to head with Lovaza ( or whatever EPA / DHA product they used )
How much of that was due to the harm of the DHA in the EPA/DHA product .
We know DHA raises LDL cholesterol for many ...higher LDL = higher CV event risk
So we may have a situation here where risk was reduced by 20% with Vascepa and increased 18% with their EPD/DHA product ....yielding the 38% RRR they publish

Kiwi

Kiwi,

I don't know enough about PS or other statistical analysis to have an opinion, but even if the number isn't exactly 38%, it's directionally accurate, and more likely than not, statistically significant.

So even if the scientific community does not accept this as significant, it's (as CaptBeer and RMB stated), like RESPECT, just one more notch in the belt for Vascepa, which helps show its positive contribution to CVD, and more importantly, BEYOND that of standard mixed Omega-3's.

In other words, it's one more study to support REDUCE-It.

Well, if we are wanting to look at RWE, researchers have to use a variety of methods to deal with confounding. The literature indicates that although there are various methods (PS being one of them) they all have their advantages and disadvantages. To decide which option is the best for a given problem requires the assistance of a statistician specially trained in the area of causal effect estimation. There is no way I can figure out if that has happened in this case. But I will say this; when we have trial after trial and analysis after analysis all showing a clear advantage (what was it RESPECT not quite stat sig?) for EPA wrt CVD, and as far as I know no trials or analyses that show EPA having no or detrimental effect, I would have to err on the side of taking this VA study as matching what we have seen in RCTs. Not to mention that we have a number of studies that have shown than mixed O-3s show no to very little benefit wrt CVD (STRENGTH etc), so again this fits. Good paper on these causal interference analysis methods:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352827319301545?via%3Dihub

Over the years I've got to be pretty good in the science of lipidology, and since March 30, 2020 in patent law, but I have to draw the line at biostatistics. I have no friggin idea what a PS is or how to score the results using this method. 

However, since much adou has been written and made about mineral oil as a comparator, I'm going to enthusiastically accept a 38% RRR in a head to head of Lovaza(?) vs VASCEPA! without any if and's or buts. 

IT's THE EPA STUPID!

Hmm. theres a lot of issues with this study IMHO . We know the separation lines didn't separate for IIRC at least a year in R-IT ....but in this trial a 38% RR was achieved in 9 mths ?
I'm a fan of Laurents analysis but they used propensity scoring in this analysis . We addressed measured confounding via nearest-neighbor pairwise propensity score (PS) matching. Logistic regression was used to construct PS, as informed by expert-identified variables meeting the disjunctive cause criterion. ...which many in the field would have issues with


Propensity score methods, while useful in observational studies, have several limitations and potential problems when applied to clinical trials:

Inability to account for unmeasured confounders: Propensity score matching can only adjust for measured independent variables, not unmeasured ones25. This can lead to residual confounding, potentially biasing the results.

No definitive cause-effect conclusions: Unlike randomized controlled trials (RCTs), propensity score matching cannot establish definitive cause-effect relationships between treatments and outcomes2.

Reduced sample size: Matching based on propensity scores can significantly reduce the sample size, as matches may not be found for all patients9. This can limit the statistical power of the study.

Potential for misspecification: The effectiveness of propensity scoring depends on correctly identifying and including all relevant factors that influence treatment assignment5. Omitting important variables can diminish the method's effectiveness.

Perfect prediction issues: In some cases, propensity scoring can lead to perfect prediction of treatment allocation, which can be problematic for analysis3.

Lack of generalizability: Oversimplification of complex clinical scenarios in propensity score models may limit the generalizability of results3.

Bias from chance imbalances: Especially in small studies, substantial chance imbalances may still exist and yield conditional bias in the treatment effect estimator4.

Handling missing data: Dealing with missing covariates when generating propensity scores can be challenging and may introduce bias if not handled properly6.

While propensity score methods can be valuable in certain situations, particularly when RCTs are impractical, researchers must be aware of these limitations and interpret results cautiously.




Kiwi

Thanks Nukem...... I'm almost through mourning......that #77 is just a road grader of a man.... oh well, we had a chance on that last drive..... I thought Stafford was going to rip the heart out of the Eagles....... so hard to stop their run game though with that O line and Barkley. I'm very impressed with my young D though. Relentless.

rioting in Detroit Never in a million years

Have to be careful with that, as it is quite possible that RFK Jr. favors generics vs Brand Pharma.

Dang, condolences RAMFAN, the Rams almost pulled it off. Passing the ball in a snow storm is always tough. Saquon Barkley stole the show. LA's lack of a running game hurt their chances. Mekhi Becton #77 OL is a beast ain't nobody getting past him.

The Chinese need to be convinced that V is an ancient herbal medicinal and save a shitload of money!

https://www.wsj.com/world/americas/cattle-gallstones-chinese-traditional-medicine-c12d6d78?st=Wrs9bk&reflink=article_email_share

https://stocktwits.com/BlueCollars/message/600718107

Come on RAMS! 2:33 4th Qtr. Rams have the ball. 22-28. 

And people should scroll down that post you link to to see a comment by Laurent Maldague (who is a valued poster here) who posted a RWE trial by the VA that was published in April 2024. The comparator in that study was O-3 (not mineral oil) so it should shut up the naysayers. Company needs to pound that info.

https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/S0735-1097%2824%2903313-8

https://stocktwits.com/SanDiegoLiving/message/600677832

Was pulling for Rams today but concerned since in those 4 divisional games usually the road team rarely wins more than 1.  And since Wash won yesterday will make it tougher today, plus the Ravens have a decent chance as well. Well here's hoping. 

How's your Italian?
https://www.pharmastar.it/pharmastartv//business/amarin-introduce-in-italia-un-nuovo-farmaco-contro-il-rischio-cardiovascolare-residuo-13781

No case for Antitrust against Amarin too unless generic thieves want to use more API supply to infringe CVD.

Dang, I wake up to an upset. Washington Commanders 45, Detroit Lions 31.... I'll bet there's rioting in Detroit. On tap for today, underdogs LA Rams vs The Eagles. 

Reinforcing proof of CVD infringement by generic thieves.

I'm actually a bit surprised I haven't seen
Sarissa try it again on another company. Unless they regret it? Who knows. But if it worked once, why not duplicate it?

What I found interesting was this comment:

"For instance, in August 2021, Woodward Pharma Services LLC announced the acquisition of LOVAZA from GlaxoSmithKline. The company further aims to educate consumers and providers to facilitate higher adoption of the product."


So they are going to spend to promote Lovaza with Generic Lovaza in the U.S. and taboo or at least not reimbursed in tge EU?

Conveniently leaving out how Sammy's flatulence caused the fire was a nice touch, pukem
dog pound your PetCam also catch that footage?

https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/growth-trends-in-the-omega-3-prescription-drugs-market-2025-2030-researchandmarkets-com-2dba179b

Growth Trends in the Omega 3 Prescription Drugs Market 2025-2030

January 16, 2025 10:33 AM Eastern Standard Time
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250116093452/en/Growth-Trends-in-the-Omega-3-Prescription-Drugs-Market-2025-2030---ResearchAndMarkets.com

It's not (just about) LDL-c Stupid!
https://x.com/GeoWizz_/status/1880624727229858069

Thank you for your response.

Yes, I noted that statement.

My comments from my previous post were regarding a possible other application for Vascepa for joint pain, etc. I'd have to believe
that some benefits would be realized. I currently take various anti inflammatory meds for hip, knee, back pain and would be interested
in V if it were to provide safer relief. Many people would be I'm sure.

Thanks again.