ADVFN Logo

We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now

Toplists

It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Registration Strip Icon for alerts Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
Amarin Corp PLC

Amarin Corp PLC (AMRN)

0.837
-0.0219
(-2.55%)
Closed March 18 04:00PM
0.837
0.00
( 0.00% )
Pre Market: 05:44AM

Get an advanced news scanner tailored to your needs by ADVFN

Enhance your trading experience

AMRN News

Official News Only

AMRN Discussion

View Posts
Mr Stockboy Mr Stockboy 12 hours ago
"Sell in May" I wait a bit, but add another 10,000 shares in advance of buy-back. I mean, why not? Who else is loading up in advance of buy-back?
👍️ 1
north40000 north40000 13 hours ago
For a hint at direction insurers may be going, the CVS where my prescriptions for Vascepa are filled no longer stocks generic V and my GEHA insurance, managed by Caremark, will not cover generic V. See also the posts beginning with JTFM’s post #14794 to last about Medicade, various BCBS plans, on the ANIP IHub board with respect to preference for a different med.
👍️ 2
Tatsumaki Tatsumaki 14 hours ago
Note that the FDA itself has not approved any generic V for reduction of risk from CVDs as opposed to ANDAs for triglyceride reduction.
Generics will do the same thing to any future AD label as they did with a CVD label unless Amarin can sell their product below generic pricing to maintain exclusive insurance coverage.
👍️0
north40000 north40000 15 hours ago
Cold Spring Harbor scientists might disagree with you, as DMC8’s post suggests. Note that the FDA itself has not approved any generic V for reduction of risk from CVDs as opposed to ANDAs for triglyceride reduction.
👍️0
Tatsumaki Tatsumaki 15 hours ago
What makes you think any doctor would prescribe a generic for AD/dementia?
The simple fact that generic is available on the market is all it will take. Most have no issue Rx'ing the cheapest drug available. It's really only the echo chamber on here that thinks otherwise or puts the effort into chasing after insurance companies that give them the ol switcheroo, and that's likely more motivated by their underlying investment than anything else. Doubtful everyone is pounding down the door on every generic drug they ever get handed demanding brand. The rest of the country aka... the millions of average people that make a blockbuster simply do not care and take what the insurers cover.
👍️0
Bolio98 Bolio98 15 hours ago
Thanks north. No I don't have your plan, but my plan has approved the Vascepa prescription, it's just whomever these pharmacies use to apply coupons is not able to process them. In fact your Wilson Ave CVS told me a "hack" took place and that's why the coupons redemption is not working at this time.

BP at work?
👍️0
north40000 north40000 15 hours ago
A more aggressive WARF might apply. At least Vascepa is not like Ivermectin. NVDA GTC with CEO speaking about B100 chip in about an hour. Investors know about the chip. Doctors may be becoming more aware of Vascepa. What makes you think any doctor would prescribe a generic for AD/dementia?
👍️0
JRoon71 JRoon71 15 hours ago
Don't mistake my comments for thinking that EPA is not effective for A/D. I just think the time period of the study is so short, that it is going to give minimal positive results. I still think the results will be positive. I don't think they will be statistically significant. But then again, as long as they show positive outcomes (with SOME level of magnitude), then the study should be viewed as a positive for future research.

My dad died from ALZ, so believe me, I am rooting for anything that will work. It's why I have been taking EPA for a few years now (I don't qualify for V script).

But I personally believe that the BRAVE results (relative to AMRN as an investment) will be sort of a non-event.

I just wish they would hurry up and release the results!
👍️0
ORBAPU ORBAPU 15 hours ago
It’s not “some cognitive measures…” it’s a specific test.

“cognitive performance [Time Frame: 18 months]
Preclinical Alzheimer's Cognitive Composite (PACC)”

If there is any measurable divergence (in favor of IPE) at all in any of the 3 parameters, I will consider it to be important. I have a younger sibling who has been in a nursing home the past 9 years with early onset Alzheimer’s.
👍️0
ilovetech ilovetech 16 hours ago
North4000 - You might be reading my posts, but they're not sinking in. I didn't mention a word about turning to the courts, as that side of the battle was covered? For the third time, why wasn't the same urgency applied towards approaching the USPTO in parallel? I was very vocal about the idea years ago, before and after Marjac filed the shareholder case. I don't remember your exact response at the time, but let's just say it was dismissive, and to the extent, that I was even more frustrated than I was before I brought it up.
👍️0
JRoon71 JRoon71 16 hours ago
OK, I see what you mean. I was referring to both the cerebro-spinal fluid and the biomarkers when I said that (vs. outcome of A/D).

Yes, there is some cognitive measures as a secondary outcome. But based on the very short timeframe of the study, it would be doubtful for even the most effective drug to have an impact on cognitive function.

My point was just that this study was not really measuring A/D as an outcome, but rather the underlying markers that could have potential positive impact on A/D in a longer study/measurement period.
👍️0
ORBAPU ORBAPU 16 hours ago
This:

“The study was purely about bio markers.”
👍️0
ramfan60 ramfan60 16 hours ago
North, you qualify for amazing.......keep on doing whatever you are doing and may the rest of us maintain our level of mental acuity (whatever that may be ) as long....
👍️0
JRoon71 JRoon71 16 hours ago
ORBAPU, not sure what you mean. I was very familiar with the study when I posted that.
👍️0
ORBAPU ORBAPU 17 hours ago
This statement is from BRAVE detailed description:

“The proposed study aims to: 1) investigate the effects of 18 months of IPE vs. placebo on regional cerebral blood flow as measured by arterial spin-labeling MRI; 2) determine the impact of 18 months of IPE vs. placebo on CSF biomarkers of AD pathology; and 3) evaluate the effects of 18 months of IPE vs. placebo on cognitive performance.”

It’s not hard to find and saves you from substituting your opinion for fact in this public space.
👍️0
Tatsumaki Tatsumaki 17 hours ago
The right to try authority is used to provide access to drugs that are pending approval or specifically unapproved (safety) for people as a last resort for treatment. Vascepa is already on the market for multiple labels. Doctors can off label Rx V and gV to anyone for anything they want today. FDA cant stop that practice unless a clear safety issue occurs due to the drug itself. Seems highly doubtful to me FDA would use that authority as a loophole to grant Amarin exclusive access to an expanded label since the molecule is also available generic and people can readily get it. Ultimately the FDA will do nothing until Amarin or someone else actually tried to file for the label anyway.
👍️0
north40000 north40000 17 hours ago
At age 87, I guess I qualify as among the “oldest old.” My mother died in 2000 at age 92 from effects of 2 falls, inability to exercise, and resultant dementia. She did not know/recognize either my brother or me when we visited her in a Montana hospital.
👍️ 1
north40000 north40000 18 hours ago
I think Marjac would confirm that I was around “at the time.”
You might read the petition for certiorari we filed in the Supreme Court on behalf of Amarin shareholders/intervenors.
👍️0
north40000 north40000 18 hours ago
I suggest you read what you quote again to answer the question you posit.

The Veteran population is at RISK. The population studied has not yet actually developed the AD/dementia condition at study start or during the trial.
👍️0
DMC8 DMC8 18 hours ago
EPA induces an anti-inflammatory transcriptomic landscape in T cells implicating a pathway independent of triglyceride lowering in CVD risk reduction

March 17, 2024.
https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.15.585315

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.03.15.585315v1
👍️ 1
north40000 north40000 18 hours ago
It appears to me that the FDA could approve the use of Vascepa to treat AD/dementia by way of its statutory authority to approve the use of medications on a “right to try” basis, in light of the biomarkers evidence supporting such use already extant that you and kube post. Confirmatory trials confirming such use would then be initiated.
👍️ 1
ilovetech ilovetech 19 hours ago
North4000 - I wonder, like you, why Amarin has not asked for reexamination of its 4 patents in the PTO before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. The procedural effect of FRCP Rule 60(d)(3) “at any time” seems equally applicable in both the Federal Courts(Hazel-Atlas case) and BPAI. Where were you on this option right after members of this board discovered Du's decision was based on a cropped graph? When I repeatedly asked why Amrn wouldn't exercise such an opportunity, "if one exists?" I heard nothing encouraging in response at the time. Just crickets for the last 4 years. It took coming across an article about a rich BP, not a small biotech in the dumps for years, to learn there is a pathway through the USPTO to pursue. If I had that expertise, I would have adapted a Warjac approach in pursuit of that option years ago.
👍️0
north40000 north40000 19 hours ago
ziploc, your observation coincides with MRK’s mixed results at the BPAI and my own observations when I was a member of that Board in 1983-1986 before leaving to enter private practice. But that was long ago. The Undersecretary of Commerce annual report to Congress, budget hearings, may still have statistics on Board results in reexamination proceedings.

One of my last, and longest, cases as an expert witness was a jury case in Arizona. I had been deposed 4 times over a period of 25 years. The jury heard testimony on who was the 1st inventor of the subject matter in the claims of the plaintiff’s patent. The jury found the accused infringer’s witness was the 1st inventor. The Board had found likewise. Both asserted inventors had testified by way of deposition before the Board. The accused infringer’s inventor witness testified at trial. The jury heard no new testimony from the inventor named on plaintiff’s patent because he was dead. Both parties submitted documentary evidence to support respective inventor testimony. I think the parties settled.
👍️0
JRoon71 JRoon71 19 hours ago
Possibly. But it will be interesting to see if they actually detected a meaningful difference in bio markers between the two subsets (APO-e4 carriers vs. non-carriers).

Extrapolating this further, it will also beg the question if the new formulation(s) could potentially deliver EPA more efficiently to the brain in APO-e4 carriers.
👍️ 1
JRoon71 JRoon71 20 hours ago
Zip, not necessarily. BRAVE had nothing to do with A/D outcomes (there were some secondary cognitive measures, but I doubt those showed much). The study was purely about bio markers. And it's entirely possible that the study simply wasn't long enough/powerful enough to achieve its outcomes.

This is the weakness of scientific study. It can only produce what you measure. So for something like BRAVE, while it's entirely possible (more likely than not) that EPA does reduce the incidence of A/D to some degree, a study like BRAVE could come to a null conclusion.

I am just hoping that there is ENOUGH evidence (even if not statistically significant) to continue pursuing EPA as an A/D solution. Because realistically, BRAVE was not going to result in a new indication, but rather lead to additional, more extensive trials.
👍️0
the_kube the_kube 20 hours ago
The following is from the Brave study. Based on this, does this mean study’s selected participants are less likely to have any positive response to icosapent ethyl?

“The proposed study is a proof-of-concept, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group clinical trial assessing the efficacy of 18 months of icosapent ethyl (IPE) therapy on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and cognitive biomarkers for AD in 150 cognitively-healthy Veterans ages 50-70 years with increased risk for developing AD due to parental history of the disease and increased prevalence of apolipoprotein E4 (APOE4) allele.”
👍️0
ziploc_1 ziploc_1 21 hours ago
Conclusions of study...."In conclusion, higher concentrations of EPA were associated with a lower incidence of AD dementia."

This is an additional heads up that the final evidence from Brave study will show at least a positive trend in favor of minimizing AD, even if the study does not reach statistical significance(due to the small sample of patients in the study).... in reducing the incidence of AZ or ameliorating it.

As the authors suggest, more studies are indicated...In the meantime, millions of patients are growing old with Alzheimers with no safe, affordable medicines available to help them cope
👍️ 5
JRoon71 JRoon71 21 hours ago
counsel for Merck in the Keytruda patent litigation with JHU is the same counsel that Amarin is using in the Amarin v. Hikma matter now on appeal to the CAFC.
Great to know! At least we know they are up to the task

I wonder, like you, why Amarin has not asked for reexamination of its 4 patents in the PTO before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences.
But, do we necessarily know that they have NOT explored this?
👍️0
Giovinco Giovinco 22 hours ago
EPA Associated with Decreased Incidence of Alzheimer’s Dementia in the Oldest Old
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7912244/

5. Conclusions
In conclusion, higher concentrations of EPA were associated with a lower incidence of AD dementia. In addition, we observed that higher concentrations of EPA were associated with a decreased risk for all-cause and AD dementia among APOE e4 non-carriers but not among APOE e4 carriers. Furthermore, a higher percentage distribution of EPA, DHA, and ALA was not associated with incidence all-cause and AD dementia. We recommend future studies to analyze both relative fatty acid profiles and absolute fatty acid concentrations. In addition, we encourage existing and new studies to prioritize their research on the oldest old and to investigate the interaction between PUFA and APOE e4.

Scientists hope that their research will encourage future clinical studies to determine the potential benefits of EPA in Alzheimer’s disease
https://nutrition.org/omega-3-fatty-acid-rich-diets-potential-benefits-in-lowering-risk-of-alzheimers-disease/
👍️ 6
ziploc_1 ziploc_1 22 hours ago
North...From memory... the Board of patent appeals has(or had) a reputation of being very pro patent infringer.
👍️0
dogn dogn 1 day ago
New from Saudi Arabia authors
Taher Z A, Taher A A, Radi S (March 16, 2024) An Update on Dyslipidemia Management and Medications: A Review. Cureus 16(3): e56255. doi:10.7759/cureus.56255

https://www.cureus.com/articles/225432-an-update-on-dyslipidemia-management-and-medications-a-review

https://assets.cureus.com/uploads/review_article/pdf/225432/20240316-1782-zyexoy.pdf

Omega-3 Fatty Acids (FAs)

“Similar to fibrates, omega-3 FAs primarily impact triglycerides, reducing levels by 25%-30%. They are approved by the American Heart Association for use in hypertriglyceridemia. However, certain forms of omega-3 FAs may increase LDL-C levels. Despite extensive clinical trials, Omega-3 FAs have failed to demonstrate a mortality benefit in cardiovascular patients. Trials like ASCEND and STRENGTH, involving large sample sizes, did not show cardiovascular benefits [23,24]. The STRENGTH trial was terminated early due to the absence of cardiovascular benefits and common gastrointestinal side effects in the active treatment group. Unfortunately, the exact mechanism of action for Omega-3 FAs in triglyceride reduction is not well understood [25].

“It's intriguing that despite the association between hypertriglyceridemia and increased ASCVD events, omega-3 FAs and other triglyceride-lowering agents like fenofibrate have not demonstrated a decrease in ASCVD morbidity or mortality. As a result, their approval is limited to cases of severe hypertriglyceridemia (>500-1000) to prevent pancreatitis.

“The controversy surrounding this may be attributed to the possibility that omega-3 FAs were used in less effective doses or the use of different forms, such as eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and/or docosahexaenoic acid. This highlights the importance of understanding the nuances in dosages and specific formulations when studying the effectiveness of these agents in preventing cardiovascular events [26].

“The REDUCE-IT trial focused on studying icosapent ethyl, a form of omega-3 FA, administered at a dosage of 2 g twice daily with meals. This trial spanned five years and included nearly 5000 participants. The findings revealed that individuals in the active treatment group were 25% less likely than the comparison group to develop unstable angina, undergo coronary revascularization, experience non-fatal myocardial infarction, and suffer a stroke [27).

Following the positive outcomes from the REDUCE-IT trial, the FDA granted approval to EPA in December 2019 for use in patients with triglyceride levels >150 mg/dL, established cardiovascular disease or diabetes, and two or more additional risk factors for cardiovascular disease. This underscores the potential of specific formulations and dosages of omega-3 FAs in reducing cardiovascular events in high-risk individuals [28].”

dogn
👍️ 2
dogn dogn 1 day ago
Change in Cardiology 4,0
11 - 12 - 13 April 2024
Lingotto Congress Center - Turin, Italy
https://www.changeincardiology.it/

5.1 training credits
From https://www.changeincardiology.it/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/V3-PROGRAMMA-PRELIMINARE.pdf

Thursday April 11 session “Lipid-lowering agents and antithrombotic therapy in the acute stage,” final talk before discussion “How to deal with residual risk beyond LDL: the role of icosapent ethyl”
👍️ 1
dogn dogn 1 day ago
Change in Cardiology 4,0
11 - 12 - 13 April 2024
Lingotto Congress Center - Turin, Italy

5.1 training credits
https://www.changeincardiology.it/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/V3-PROGRAMMA-PRELIMINARE.pdf

Thursday April 11 session “Lipid-lowering agents and antithrombotic therapy in the acute stage,” final talk before discussion “How to deal with residual risk beyond LDL: the role of icosapent ethyl”
👍️ 2
north40000 north40000 1 day ago
See also #422127 and subsequent replies thereto.
👍️0
north40000 north40000 1 day ago
Good. In light of the first sentence of your post, others here may not know or have recognized that counsel for Merck in the Keytruda patent litigation with JHU is the same counsel that Amarin is using in the Amarin v. Hikma matter now on appeal to the CAFC. I wonder, like you, why Amarin has not asked for reexamination of its 4 patents in the PTO before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. The procedural effect of FRCP Rule 60(d)(3) “at any time” seems equally applicable in both the Federal Courts(Hazel-Atlas case) and BPAI. But the timing and enhanced litigation cost may not be appropriate in light of other matters Amarin is considering. See letter to shareholders and CEO Holts remarks at JPM.
👍️0
dogn dogn 1 day ago
From JP Morgan transcript at https://seekingalpha.com/article/4662245-amarin-corporation-plc-amrn-42nd-annual-jpmorgan-healthcare-conference-transcript

“Lastly, we are very encouraged by our rest of world progress, particularly China, where we've launched the very high triglyceride indication and we have had -- the China FDA accepted our filing for cardiovascular risk reduction.”

I understood this to mean the filing was received, perhaps met compliance checks: “we got your filing”… and not yet evaluated let alone approved.

Later Holt said:
“When we think about rest of world, there are millions of patients that we have the opportunity to access with our important partners globally. As one example, in China, we have just now launched the very high triglyceride indication in China and we have had the, as I mentioned, the larger cardiovascular risk reduction indication accepted by the China FDA with a clinical trial waiver, which is a very important milestone for the business via our partners, Eddingpharm.”

I don’t think he was choosing words carefully to mislead but unfortunate if read as stated that the “CRR indication” was accepted as it’s clearly just the filing from everything else that has been publicly disclosed. I would like to hear more about the details/meaning & confirmation of “clinical trial waiver”... how is it waived before filing is processed and approved? I know very little about the Chinese drug approval process.

Here is the Eddingpharm press release:

NMPA Accepts Marketing Application for VASCEPA® (icosapent ethyl) Cardiovascular Risk Reduction (CVRR) Indication
https://www.eddingpharm.com/EN/newsDetail/1141
SHANGHAI, CHINA, November 14, 2023 - EDDING announced that the new indication marketing application for the innovative cardiovascular drug VASCEPA® (icosapent ethyl) has been officially accepted by the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA).This indication would allow for VASCEPA® to be used in combination with statins for adult patients with elevated and high triglycerides (TG)and established cardiovascular disease or diabetes mellitus with =2 other cardiovascular disease risk factors, combined with hypertriglyceridemia, to prevent and reduce the risk of cardiovascular events (including cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, and unstable angina requiring hospitalization).
“"We are very pleased that the application for the CVRR Indication of VASCEPA® was accepted by the NMPA”, said Jing Zhai, Vice President of Business Department, EDDING.”
“For the currently submitted indication, VASCEPA® can provide a new and strong evidence-based treatment option to reduce residual cardiovascular risk in statin treated patients with elevated and high TG levels in clinical practice. We will hope that in the future, VASCEPA® could help to reduce ASCVD risk and events in patients, contributing to the comprehensive management and prevention of cardiovascular diseases in China."
“On behalf of the Amarin we team, we congratulate our partners at EDDING for this critical step in their efforts to secure the CVRR indication for VASCEPA® as a potential expanded indication for patients in China," said Steven Ketchum, Ph.D., President, Research & Development and Chief Scientific Officer, Amarin.
dogn
👍️ 1
ilovetech ilovetech 1 day ago
Yes, according to the article I read, and unsuccessfully linked, Merck chose not to go the legal route, and instead, chose to petition the USPTO. When Du adapted a falsified doc and testimony to declare that the USPTO's bases for granting the Marine patent was "weak," I sounded off. I asked, "why Amrn wouldn't just ask the USPTO to notify the court, that it had reviewed the study which Du relied upon, and mischaracterized as Stat Sig, when the Study actually stated APO B reduction was Not Stat Sig? I didn't get from you at the time, that this option was actionable. Amrn management/BOD had no skin in the game. They were like sheep, those bastards. I figured when Denner saw his invest take a dive, that he might at the very least, try to get creative, I.e. approach the USPTO. I would have went straight to their offices asking for a meeting if it was me. This was a case of FRAUD. Bureaucracy be damned. LOVAZA is still ripping. No balls out there.
👍️0
north40000 north40000 2 days ago
Your memory is better than what I forgot had been mentioned several times by Amarin CEO Holt in the transcript of remarks from the JPM conference. Thanks, RMB.
👍️0
rosemountbomber rosemountbomber 2 days ago
That is definitely a good question but according to the Amarin presentation at the JP Morgan thingy, Amarin stated that the CVRR indication was accepted by the health authorities in China with a clinical trial waiver. I tried to copy and paste the relevant part but I could not so here is the whole doc:
https://amarincorp.gcs-web.com/static-filesebc12d57-19da-4812-847a-80184a131624
👍️0
north40000 north40000 2 days ago
Will China require confirmation trials in patients of Chinese ancestry, not European ancestry? I forget how many Chinese travelled to that island location near Guangdong to be treated with Vascepa for CVDs.
👍️0
north40000 north40000 2 days ago
Ilovetech, I am hampered in responding to your question because your #422218 link failed to provide any Merck litigation links. Merck’s been involved in numerous PTO reexamination matters dating back ~ 2 decades. Do you mean the Keytruda patents litigation referred to here?:

BeckersHospitalreview.com
👍️0
seve333 seve333 2 days ago
Hard to imagine a year into denner we are back under a buck again with our only real catalyst being a stock buyback in two months. He may eventually get the price up but this is not at all how I imagined this would go.
👍️0
CaptBeer CaptBeer 2 days ago
PREPARE Clinical Trial:

I sent an email to one of the PI’s in this trial:
Hello Dr. Song,

I see that the results of your PREPARE Trial have been posted at ClinicalTrials.gov. It appears that the Primary Outcome Measure (Change in Marine Omega-3 PUFA Composition in Colorectal Tissues as a result of the AMR101 Treatment) has been met. Do you plan on publishing the results, and what are the clinical implications for treating patients with the drug?

Here’s the reply I got back:

Hi Mike,
The posted results are only part of the full data, because a subset of the samples failed the lab assays due to technical issues.
We do plan to publish the full results, hopefully by the end of this year. Thanks for your interest!
👍️ 2
ilovetech ilovetech 2 days ago
North4000 - Thanks for your reply. In case I wasn't clear in my prior post, I'm referring to the loss of the marine patents for obviousness. Where Amrn clearly earned the patent after earlier rejections "due to an unexpected decrease in APO B." BUT Du adapted Generic's citation of an underpowered, inappropriate trial population study, to claim a stat Sig reduction in APO B, when in fact, the author of that paper said the opposite! It led to Du disagreeing with the PTO, when she stated that the PTO's finding of a reduction in APO B was "weak." At the time we had posters here who quickly uncovered that fraudulent citation, and I kept pressing for getting the USPTO to step in to clarify the record. Your response to that suggestion, and I don't remember the exact wording, but let's just say, it was a huge damper on any hope I held for exploring that option at minimum. It's one thing to ask perhaps, supporting an issue which is not well defined reasoning, that schedules are hectic and resources stretched, but we have a falsified court doc and purjurious testimony. What's wrong with asking the USPTO to step in to correct the record? If you can't ask them to do something that rises to a moral obligation, then the USPTO is a worthless. Inept at best. Period. Full stop.
👍️ 1
dogn dogn 2 days ago
New Research from China
ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Cardiovasc. Med., 14 March 2024
Sec. Cardiovascular Epidemiology and Prevention
Volume 11 - 2024 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2024.1328087
Decreased circulating omega-3 fatty acids increase the risk of myocardial infarction: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study

Wei Wang1,2 Linfei Yang1,2 Jing Zhang1,2 Haiyun Xiang2,3*
1Department of Cardiology, The Second People’s Hospital of Hefei, Hefei, Anhui, China
2Department of Cardiology, Hefei Hospital Affiliated to Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China
3Infant Care Services and Management, Institution of Culture Tourism and Education, Anhui Technical College of Industry and Economy, Hefei, Anhui, China

“In this research, we extracted the summary data from published large genetic studies to detect whether there was a causal relationship between omega-3 fatty acids and the risk for MI by TSMR analysis.”

“study theoretically proved the causal relationship between omega-3 fatty acids and myocardial infarction” in subjects of European ancestry

“Conclusion

This study highlights the potential value of omega-3 fatty acids in reducing the risk of myocardial infarction.”

relevant citations:
References

1. Bhatt DL, Steg PG, Miller M, Brinton EA, Jacobson TA, Ketchum SB, et al. Cardiovascular risk reduction with icosapent ethyl for hypertriglyceridemia. N Engl J Med. (2019) 380(1):11–22. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa181279230415628

42. Mason RP, Libby P, Bhatt DL. Emerging mechanisms of cardiovascular protection for the omega-3 fatty acid eicosapentaenoic acid. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. (2020) 40(5):1135–47. doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.119.31328632212849

dogn
👍️ 2
north40000 north40000 2 days ago
The resolution is already present in post #/…’247, my original response to you. No waiting. I always will pay $15 co-pay in that particular CVS you called w/o a new coupon, may be $9 if I contact Amarin and get a new coupon. But do you have my gov’t insurance plan, GEHA? Note the most recent posts of DMC8 and CaptBeer re Vascepa becoming “preferred” drug to treat CVDs and for “longevity”.
👍️0
Giovinco Giovinco 2 days ago
Relax, it's 30 business days (about 1 month and half) to get the notice + 180 days to cure + often appeal for another 180 days, it's the last of our problems
👍️0
CaptBeer CaptBeer 2 days ago
Let's get Real!
@PamTaubMD @ErinMichos @SABOURETCardio @gabrielsteg @mmillermd1 @DLBHATTMD @VietHeartPA @BudoffMd @PrakritiGaba @drpablocorral @drlipid
Let’s get real! For the living, the only CV end point that really matters is CV Mortality. You have choices. modified after Nelson, J.R. pic.twitter.com/wJCLJQLWoj— Mike Everts (@GeoWizz_) March 17, 2024
👍️ 1
DMC8 DMC8 2 days ago
https://stocktwits.com/AxelOlsson/message/566157397
👍️0
Bolio98 Bolio98 2 days ago
Thanks north, but I called and they have been having the coupon problem too. Guess I just have to wait for it to be resolved.
👍️0

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

Support: 1-888-992-3836 | help@advfn.com