Based on all kinds talking about it, I thought it might be the magic bullet. Then, I finally decided to do a research. I only found 10 articles on this topic by searching PubMed. Among those 10, 3 are review articles, 1 is marginally related, 1 is a case report, and another one is just a commentary piece. So there are only 4 original studies. Considering the first article was published in 1998, I'm wondering why there is not much interest on this subject.
I am also surprised on the lack of articles and studies on a drug that is supposed to have so much potential. Of course there are all of those small pediatric studies that show plenty of promise. Let’s just hope this current phase 3 trial in adults lives up to the hype.
I’ll definitely keep sweeping the Internet for even the smallest update on Vanco and PSC.
I agree, there isn't a lot out there.
The biggest issue is money. Research is almost always paid for by the drug companies. Viropharma no longer has patent protection for either of its Vancomycin products. This is why we don't have press releases, 100+ patient trials, and a push for FDA approval. Aside from individual case studies and smaller trials, it is really hard to make the rest of it happen without this big money.
We have three groups that have run trials. Mass General and Mayo had improvements in ALP with ~70% of patients and had a few normalize. This is despite a few questionable decisions regarding their protocols (IV dosing schedule in the Mass General trial; very low dose and likely an inferior brand used for Mayo). Stanford has had all of their patients without cirrhosis completely normalize and the others improve. They have also been doing this the longest and have had more time to perfect their protocol. Notably, all of these trials have had less than 15 patients. The upcoming Stanford adult/pediatric trial promises to be much larger.
But look at ursodeoxycholic acid, there are about 40+ clinical research papers on it (actual number should be slightly less). It can't be explained by your suggestion.
Dennis said:
Could it be because p.s.c. is a very rare disease? Maybe it is difficult to find enough reliable data from patients for research and/or there is not much motivation from pharmaceutical companies for research, because there is not much money to be made?
Again, I doubt it's the money. A good example is ursodeoxycholic acid. They are on the same boat but there are many more studies on ursodeoxycholic acid.
jtb said:
I agree, there isn't a lot out there.
The biggest issue is money. Research is almost always paid for by the drug companies. Viropharma no longer has patent protection for either of its Vancomycin products. This is why we don't have press releases, 100+ patient trials, and a push for FDA approval. Aside from individual case studies and smaller trials, it is really hard to make the rest of it happen without this big money.
We have three groups that have run trials. Mass General and Mayo had improvements in ALP with ~70% of patients and had a few normalize. This is despite a few questionable decisions regarding their protocols (IV dosing schedule in the Mass General trial; very low dose and likely an inferior brand used for Mayo). Stanford has had all of their patients without cirrhosis completely normalize and the others improve. They have also been doing this the longest and have had more time to perfect their protocol. Notably, all of these trials have had less than 15 patients. The upcoming Stanford adult/pediatric trial promises to be much larger.
Urso is being used to treat several diseases. In pbc, for example, it appears to help.
Vanco for psc is being pursued by small group of researchers without the backing on big pharma.
Besides, I’m not sure urso is on the same boat, whatever it means
I mean money-wise. Vancomycin is commonly used in surgical prophylaxis. If some of research money on Urso are from those manufacturers, I guess those with Vanco can spare some too.
Ted said:
Urso is being used to treat several diseases. In pbc, for example, it appears to help.
Vanco for psc is being pursued by small group of researchers without the backing on big pharma.
Besides, I'm not sure urso is on the same boat, whatever it means
Did you get the full texts or just the abstracts?