Carl Remick wrote:
>
>
> On the contrary, the more uses a drug has, the more profitable it is to a
> drug company. But what drugmakers like most, I believe, is new "off-label"
> uses for a drug -- i.e., uses for purposes other than those that the FDA has
> OK'd. What these companies don't like is spending money to get these drugs
> officially sanctioned for new uses.
>
All those old meds are generic now. Bayer can't raise the price of its aspirin just because it now works to prevent stroke. It hasn't made Bayer a penny. And now that Prozac is open to generics it wouldn't make its company any money if someone discovered that it would cure cancer. All the other drug companies could put out competing brands. I have a Midrin prescription (to use when despite Zanaflex I still get a headache) -- but it's not Midrin but a generic made by another company that I get. A new use for Midrin would help Walgreen and Osco, but not the original developer of Midrin.
No one takes Elavil anymore, they take generic amitriptyline. So a new use of it would not help the original developer of Elavil.
And once a drug has been approved for one use, it can be prescribed for any purpose by any physician. The FDA has never approved amitriptyline for migraine, but it is prescribed by thousands of doctors for migraine. I take 50 mg. of it every night to avoid waking up at 2am. (The minimal dosage as an AD is 100 mg.). The FDA has never passed on it as a sedative. And the FDA has never passed on Zanaflex for migraine but only for (whatever -- I forget the illness it was originally approved for). As soon as its time runs out, thousands will began to take it for migraine in some cheap generic form made by other companies.
Carrol