This Is No Vioxx 2.0

Before you go, we thought you'd like these...
Before you go close icon

Merck said on Friday that it was pulling Tredaptive from the 40 countries it's sold in.

As bad as it sounds, this is essentially a non-event. It's nothing like the pharma giant pulling Vioxx nearly a decade ago. Nothing.

First and foremost, Tredaptive produced sales of less than $20 million in 2012. Merck sold $661 million worth of Vioxx in just one quarter before it was pulled off the market.


The lost future sales are a much bigger deal. But they were already priced in after a clinical trial failed to demonstrate that Tredaptive decreases cardiovascular events. If the trial had been successful, Tredaptive would likely have been approved in the U.S., and sales in Europe and elsewhere would have picked up. Woulda, colulda, shoulda.

Pulling Tredaptive should also be cheaper on the litigation side than Vioxx was. Merck said patients taking Tredaptive had increased side effects compared to placebo, but hasn't elaborated further. In a clinical trial of more than 25,000 patients, it's easy to discover rare side effects, but they're not likely to affect that many people, especially since, based on sales, not that many people are taking the drug. And it was never approved in the litigation-happy U.S., which should limit frivolous lawsuits.

How the failed clinical trial will affect sales of AbbVie's Niaspan isn't really clear. The drugs are fairly similar -- both are extended-release niacin -- but Tredaptive also contains a second component designed to stop the annoying side effect of causing patients to feel hot and sweaty. AbbVie can claim that the second component is inhibiting the positive effects of the niacin. It may not matter one way or the other to AbbVie since Niaspan might see generic competition as early as September of this year.

One company, Amarin , could be setting itself up for a Vioxx-sized disaster. Like Merck, the biotech is running a cardiac outcomes study, and while Amarin's Vascepa isn't related to Tredaptive, I continue to believe it's hard to show added benefit beyond what a change in diet and the addition of a statin can do. Considering that Amarin doesn't have any other drugs, a negative trial result in a few years would be disastrous.

When winners outpace disasters
Not all of Motley Fool co-founder David Gardner's picks are winners, but the ones that are have frequently trounced the market by large margins. How? Because he's always on the lookout for revolutionary stocks and recommends them before Wall Street catches on to their disruptive potential. If you're interested in how David discovers his winners, click here to get instant access to a personal tour behind David's Supernova service.

The article This Is No Vioxx 2.0 originally appeared on Fool.com.

Brian Orelli has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Copyright © 1995 - 2013 The Motley Fool, LLC. All rights reserved. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Read Full Story

Want more news like this?

Sign up for Finance Report by AOL and get everything from business news to personal finance tips delivered directly to your inbox daily!

Subscribe to our other newsletters

Emails may offer personalized content or ads. Learn more. You may unsubscribe any time.

From Our Partners