Couldn't find what you looking for?

TRY OUR SEARCH!

Patients actively seeking information about new drugs have better chances of getting them from their doctors. However, the long-term side effects of new drugs are often unknown, and the drugs that passed the test of time might be safer option.

When we have medical problems and have to go to a doctor, we often have no idea what kind of pills will be prescribed to us even when we know what is our illness. We often rely entirely on the specialists’ knowledge and experience and don’t question why a particular drug was given to us. However, many other people, especially those suffering from long-term chronic illnesses, take a proactive approach and investigate what options are available. Often this people come to their GPs knowing exactly what they would prefer to see on their prescription. Do these people get any better results in terms of effectiveness of their treatment? Or they simply waste their time trying to do the job of qualified specialists?

Information seeking patients have better chances of getting novel drugs

Recent research shows that the patients searching for information on their conditions and treatments can indeed get a better deal.  Researchers from National Cancer Institute’s Center of Excellence in Cancer Communication Research at the University of Pennsylvania studied correlation between information-seeking and the frequency of prescription of recently marketed new drugs. These days, internet and mass media provide plenty of information about recently developed drugs. Most of novel medicines receive a detailed coverage on television and in newspapers as well.

For the purpose of this study, scientists checked the treatment history of 663 patients with colorectal cancer. They patients were chosen randomly. Researchers hypothesized that those patients who have read about new drugs for colorectal cancer might ask their doctors about them and, consequently, have a better chance of receiving new medicines. When the study was performed, two new treatments for colorectal cancer, Avastin and Erbitux, were approved. Internet and media coverage of these drugs was significant, and it was reasonable to expect that those patients who are diagnosed with colorectal cancer might have heard of them.

The findings confirmed the hypothesis. Patients actively looking for information were indeed obtaining better, new treatments. The difference between proactive patients and the others was very significant. People who were looking for information on new drugs were 3.22 times more likely to get them.

Novel drugs are not necessarily the best

So, proactive approach can indeed secure you a novel medical treatment. But does it really guarantee that you will be cured faster and more effectively?

The conclusions of the above study doesn’t really mean that each and every individual should do his/her home work browsing internet and scientific or medical literature before each appointment with a doctor. Medical professionals naturally tend to prescribe the drugs that are well proven to work. Test of time is the best guarantee for the drug’s safety and efficacy. All drugs have side effects. Long-term side effects are often unknown. There were plenty of examples when well proven drugs approved by governmental regulatory bodies were withdrawn after many years of use. One relatively recent example of such a drug is Vioxx (Rofecoxib). This is a pain killer developed by Merck, a blockbuster drug from the coxibs family of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. This effective drug turned out to significantly increase the chances of myocardial infarction when used regularly for longer than 6 months.

Is It Wise To Discuss All Treatment Options With Doctors?

Using novel medicines may bring additional benefits but for the price of slightly higher risk. Nonetheless, it never hurts to ask your doctor about all available options. Transition of drugs from clinical trials to general use in clinics and hospitals is rarely smooth, and there is certain degree of inertia in medical circles when it comes to introducing new drugs.

Doctors and patients may have different views on the treatment decisions

From the marketing point of view, drugs are rather interesting products. The end user typically does not have a say in the choice of medicine. When you buy a box of cereals in the shop, you choose a particular box of flakes that you want, pay for it and consume it. When it comes to drugs, the choice is done by doctor, and payment often comes from a health insurance. Your only role is to take your pills with a glass of water. If your health insurance or a national health service in your country doesn’t pay for a particular drug, this usually means that you have no access to it, even if the drug is good and effective.

This separation of roles in choosing, paying and consuming of drugs can create certain problems. Proactive individuals would often question why a particular drug is available to, let’s say, American customers but can’t be obtained in Britain. Or why certain drugs are prescribed to one patient but denied to another one with the same diagnosis.

There were several recent lawsuits filed by breast cancer patients who thought that they were unfairly denied a better drug for their conditions. Unfortunately, these patients didn’t realize that the drugs in question are suitable only to a small percentage of breast cancer patients with a specific genetic mutations in cancer cells. Also, quite a lot of lawsuits are filed each year with regards to the side effects of various drugs. Side effects are not completely predictable and can be more severe than anticipated.

With safety of patients in mind, medical practitioners might be cautious about drugs that are new and have just came to the market. Of course, they would consider prescribing these drugs to the patients. After all, all drugs pass numerous safety tests and clinical trials. But if you insist on giving you a newly introduced treatment, you have to keep in mind that it still remains a bit experimental and nobody can guarantee your complete safety.

Read full article

Your thoughts on this

User avatar Guest
Captcha