• DPMC Moderators: thegreenhand | tryptakid
  • Drug Policy & Media Coverage Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Drug Busts Megathread Video Megathread

Female "Viagra" approved by FDA

Kittycat5

Bluelighter
Joined
Dec 23, 2013
Messages
9,361
The first prescription drug to enhance women’s sexual drive won regulatory approval on Tuesday, clinching a victory for a lobbying campaign that had accused the Food and Drug Administration of gender bias for ignoring the sexual needs of women.

The drug — Addyi from Sprout Pharmaceuticals — is actually the first drug approved to treat a flagging or absent libido for either sex. Viagra and other drugs available for men are approved to help achieve erections, or to treat certain deficiencies of the hormone testosterone, not to increase desire.

Advocates who pressed for approval of Addyi, many of them part of a coalition called Even the Score, said that a drug to improve women’s sex lives was long overdue, given the many options available to men.

I personally believe that treatments need to be developed for women struggling with decreased libido, I just am not sure this drug is the answer. It seems to have no real benefit based on one criteria and moderate at best on another.

The owners of the company who got this approved were also reprimanded by FDA for improperly promoting a testosterone supplement in an earlier incarnation of their company, so they seem to be willing to go the extra mile for profits.


Full article here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/19/business/fda-approval-addyi-female-viagra.html?smid=tw-bna&_r=1
 
The idea of prescribing what is essentially an antidepressant as the remedy to low female sexual desire (even if it works) makes me want to fire all pharmaceutical companies and prescribing clinicians into the Sun.
 
Why? Lots of drugs have multiple indications. I fully agree that the drug shouldn't be approved if the risk vs reward is too high, which given the purpose of the drug probably wouldn't be hard to reach. I also fully agree that these pharmaceutical companies should be stopped from marketing directly to customers what is a prescription drug.

But I don't see why the drug is bad purely because it might also have some antidepressant action. If some women want a drug to boost their sex drive, why shouldn't one be made available if a safe one is discovered. Though I also agree I'm against the way these companies try to convince people they have a problem to which they've just discovered a solution for.
 
Why? Lots of drugs have multiple indications. I fully agree that the drug shouldn't be approved if the risk vs reward is too high, which given the purpose of the drug probably wouldn't be hard to reach. I also fully agree that these pharmaceutical companies should be stopped from marketing directly to customers what is a prescription drug.

Agreed. And if it works, I have no judgement for people who choose to seek it out and take it.

But I don't see why the drug is bad purely because it might also have some antidepressant action. If some women want a drug to boost their sex drive, why shouldn't one be made available if a safe one is discovered. Though I also agree I'm against the way these companies try to convince people they have a problem to which they've just discovered a solution for.

It's kind of an emotional-slash-political response. I find it really problematic to pathologise low sexual desire in the first place, especially when the standard for assessing women as "defective" in this manner seems to be "doesn't want sex as much as a stereotypical man". It's totally normal to go through periods of your life - sometimes long periods of your life - where you're not really interested in sex, especially if you're past menopause, or a new parent, or in a very long term monogamous relationship. I'm not OK with telling women in these circumstances that they have a medical condition that needs treating, especially with drugs that have a high side effect profile, unless the lack of libido is causing the woman a quality of life impairing level of distress (and no, bullying by your higher-libido partner doesn't count).

My gut feeling is also that if men were told that the solution to their erectile dysfunction or low libido was antidepressants, there would be much scoffing and eye rolling.
 
Putting aside everything else it seems to be an extremely shitty drug.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/08/why-flibanserin-is-not-the-female-viagra/401789/ said:
It’s also been rejected twice, for concerns that lingered even after an FDA advisory committee voted 18-6 in June to recommend approval. The drug has an effectiveness rate of somewhere between 8 and 13 percent, and can cause side effects like fainting, dizziness, and low blood pressure, many of which were found to be exacerbated by alcohol and hormonal contraception. When it comes to market in October, Addyi’s label will carry a warning that it can’t be taken with alcohol. (And in the alcohol-safety study submitted to the FDA, oddly, 23 of the 25 participants were men, meaning the effects of drinking while on the drug still aren’t fully understood for the women who will be taking it.)
 
why would the participants be almost all men for a drug aimed towards women...

I agree though that if this information is accurate, it probably shouldn't be approved by the FDA.
 
If it's true and this is mostly placebo, then I hope they find something that actually works sooner rather than later.

Is it a lack of research funding or just a complexity issue? Have there been any libido drugs for men or just erection drugs? I imagine the act of getting someone horny and in the mood for sex with a pill is much more complex than triggering an erection with a pill. I'm no scientist though.
 
6 buckets said:
It's kind of an emotional-slash-political response. I find it really problematic to pathologise low sexual desire in the first place, especially when the standard for assessing women as "defective" in this manner seems to be "doesn't want sex as much as a stereotypical man". It's totally normal to go through periods of your life - sometimes long periods of your life - where you're not really interested in sex, especially if you're past menopause, or a new parent, or in a very long term monogamous relationship. I'm not OK with telling women in these circumstances that they have a medical condition that needs treating, especially with drugs that have a high side effect profile, unless the lack of libido is causing the woman a quality of life impairing level of distress (and no, bullying by your higher-libido partner doesn't count).

edBQBeJ.jpg


This compound is not analogous to sidafinil, which affects performance and physical response without affecting desire.

ebola
 
why would the participants be almost all men for a drug aimed towards women...

Because that's how medicine works. Almost all clinical trials are done on able bodied young adult men, most of whom tend to be white. Women only tend to be recruited for specific factors like pregnancy, menopause, etc.

You think this would count, though.
 
Because that's how medicine works. Almost all clinical trials are done on able bodied young adult men, most of whom tend to be white.

This is getting better and better though (most researchers no longer treat the male body as 'default'). In the case of this medication, it was originally developed as an atypical anti-depressant...but I'm not sure why that subject pool was so overwhelmingly male. Maybe they were drawing from a disproportionate population of potential volunteers.

ebola
 
This is getting better and better though (most researchers no longer treat the male body as 'default'). In the case of this medication, it was originally developed as an atypical anti-depressant...but I'm not sure why that subject pool was so overwhelmingly male. Maybe they were drawing from a disproportionate population of potential volunteers.

ebola

Or they excluded things that disproportionately affect women? We'll never know.
 
Clinical drug trials tend to favor males for two reasons that I know of:
1) males volunteer for drug trials at a much higher rate
2) sexually active females are usually excluded due to the potential danger to the fetus
 
They cannot recruit women on birth control or give pregnancy tests?

Some trials will go that route, but even then it introduces risk. No birth control is perfect, and with pregnancy tests what if the woman enters the trial before getting pregnant, but gets pregnant during the trial and the fetus is exposed to the drug during the first few weeks of gestation (the phase where drugs are most likely to cause birth defects)?

I think most clinical drug trials operate under the philosophy that even one unborn child harmed by an unproven drug is too many, so a lot of women are excluded on that basis. I'm not saying that's the best way to go about it, but that's the rationale I've heard for doing things that way.
 
Clinical drug trials tend to favor males for two reasons that I know of:
1) males volunteer for drug trials at a much higher rate
2) sexually active females are usually excluded due to the potential danger to the fetus

Which is a bit short sighted, considering that there are numerous medications that cause damage to sperm and can cause birth defects if taken by sexually active men who impregnate women, not just women who become pregnant.
 
After all that hype it doesn’t seem like anyone is going to use it. Bolds are mine.

http://www.statnews.com/2015/11/17/pharmalot-addyi-female-libido/

The new pill for female sexual dysfunction may be one of the most talked-about new drugs of the year, but it is not getting off to such a hot start.

After two weeks of availability, a total of 80 prescriptions were filled for Addyi through October 30, according to IMS Health, the market research firm.

Of course, this represents just two weeks of prescribing. Sprout Pharmaceuticals, which was recently purchased by Valeant Pharmaceuticals, began actively marketing its drug only on October 19.
Product launches also often get off to a slow start and Addyi prescriptions may have been further dampened by a key limitationthe drug must be taken every day, but never mixed with alcohol.
Nonetheless, controversy surrounding Addyi generated enormous publicity for the pill, which was the first such medication to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The primary issue was debate over whether the FDA would greenlight the pill in response to pressure tactics. To some, the media buzz suggested Addyi might stir substantial interest from women who hoped to jumpstart a low libido.
“I feared there might be a big uptake at the beginning, because it’s the first such drug,” said Cindy Pearson, executive director of the National Women’s Health Network, a nonprofit that argued against FDA approval over safety concerns and limited effectiveness. “I thought if it was accepted rapidly, there would be, perhaps, thousands of prescriptions from the start.”

The controversy over Addyi actually began well before the approval this past summer.
The drug was previously rejected twice by the FDA due to very modest benefits. After Sprout purchased the pill from Boehringer Ingelheim, the drug maker then took a calculated risk. Sprout helped orchestrate a campaign called Even the Score — which was led by some women’s groups — that accused the FDA of bias for having never approved a drug for female sexual dysfunction.

Their gripe was that the agency had approved numerous treatments — most notably Viagra — to help men combat impotence. Several lawmakers joined the fray by contacting FDA officials over this concern. This put the agency on the defensive even though there are 21 drugs already approved that contain estrogen to treat pain during sexual intercourse and vaginal dryness associated with menopause.
These problems, however, are not the same as desire. And so, there were dozens of women on hand for an FDA advisory committee last June to publicly implore the committee members to recommend that the agency approve the drug. Sprout, by the way, helped arrange for some of those women to attend the meeting.
The gambit appeared to work. The FDA approved Addyi in August, which set off a sustained round of media coverage. Still, questions remain about the extent to which some women will be willing to avoid alcohol. A small study of 25 people, mostly men, found a few experienced a severe drop in blood pressure when mixing the drug and a few drinks in a short amount of time.
This can cause fainting, so the FDA placed a warning on the Addyi product labeling about this issue. And Sprout devised a so-called risk management program to educate physicians and patients about the risk of drinking and taking Addyi. Such programs are designed to restrict availability and lower the chance that a patient develops a serious side effect.
This helps explain why the prescription rate is low so far. Some of the buzz focused on the risks and the modest benefit. Also, physicians must first complete a questionnaire in order to be certified as a qualified prescriber, although there are only a few questions to answer. Nonetheless, one Wall Street analyst, who asked not to be named, believes these factors may dampen demand indefinitely.

Another factor may be the cost, which is $780 a month, although Sprout offers a patient assistance program that may bring that down to as low as $20.

A spokeswoman for Sprout, meanwhile, noted that the drug maker hired 150 sales reps, but that marketing plans are restricted for the next few months to reaching out only to prescribers. The drug maker agreed not to advertise directly to consumers for the first 18 months. She added that there are also organizational issues under way, since Valent only recently closed the deal to buy Sprout.
 
Flibanserin, a drug for women with hypoactive sexual desire disorder. Didn't even know that a term like this exists until recently, let alone thinking of it as a diagnosis!
220px-Flibanserin.svg.png


But I'd certainly like to try this drug out. 5-HT1a full agonist, 5-HT2a antagonist (okay, this part we wouldn't need for now, a partial agonist or something could promise more fun, but 5-HT2a antagonism is associated with anxiolysis, calming effects etc, then again, 5-HT2a agonism causes an increase in oxytocin.. so no cuddling? :() and dopamine-norepinephrine disinhibitor ... might make a decent mood-lifting agent or social lubricant? These things aren't exactly pro-sexual first hands for me, but this seems to be hard to crack for me anyways and there could be definite potential. Bad mood, anxiety and all that are show stoppers for sure.

Were there any trials done with males by the way? :) (It certainly won't act like viagra, I'm not thinking of something like that either.)
 
Last edited:
Top