I don’t think it’s so straightforward. Bempedoic Acid is an outlier. I think the BA patent already expired in India, or there is some other reason why it wasn’t granted. In general, India also follows patent terms before generics can be authorized. So, it’s not as though ever drug will launch as a generic in India right away. The difference is that India doesn’t bend over completely for pharma companies and won’t entertain frivolous patent extensions and is perhaps more reserved in granting patents to begin with. Semaglutide’s patent expires in India and China in 2026. It’ll be interesting to see how the market shapes up for that.
You may be right — but the consumer may get lucky. GlobalData, which describes itself as “a leading data and analytics company,” noted in 2022 that “In February 2020, the FDA approved Esperion’s bempedoic acid under the brand name Nexletol and EMA approved it in April 2020 under the brand name Nilemdo.” “Zydus Lifesciences launched a first-in-class oral, non-statin lipid-lowering drug, bempedoic acid, under the brand name Bemdac, for the first time in India in May 2022” and “Within eight days of the launch by Zydus Lifesciences, three companies Sun Pharma, Akum Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd and Cadila Pharma have already announced plans to launch bempedoic acid in India.” " Notably, there are no generics available for bempedoic acid in the US or Europe." “Indian players can launch bempedoic acid in India as there is no valid product patent in India." “Furthermore, none of the Indian players have any partnership with Esperion for bempedoic acid.” “Bempedoic acid has a huge potential in India, based on the overall dyslipidemia patient population and the patients with uncontrolled LDL-c levels.”
This Indian government IP site lists two patents for obi: “OBICETRAPIB FOR TREATMENT OF DEMENTIAS” and “COMBINATION THERAPY OF OBICETRAPIB AND EZETIMIBE FOR USE IN STATIN INTOLERANT PATIENTS”.
https://iprsearch.ipindia.gov.in/PublicSearch/PublicationSearch/Search
If that’s exhaustive, it might mean that Indian pharmas could sell generic obi monotherapy for lipid-lowering whenever they chose to.
3 Likes
adssx
#89
4 Likes
Neo
#90
Nice
Consideration of dementia related traits indicated that lower CETP concentrations were associated higher total brain volume (0.04 per standard deviation, 95%CI 0.02; 0.06), lower risk of LBD (OR 0.81, 95%CI 0.74; 0.89) and Parkinson’s dementia risk (OR 0.26, 95%CI 0.14; 0.48).
That PD OR is incredible
Do you know who that other team is? (Or were you just saying “hopefully will be replicated”?)
1 Like
adssx
#91
It’s PD dementia not PD itself (but still an OK OR for PD, and better than other lipid-lowering therapies).
Ah yes I wasn’t clear and meant “hopefully will be replicated”.
1 Like
adssx
#92
ApoA1 might be protective against AD (association, causality TBC): Parkinson's disease - #338 by adssx
Good news: obicetrapib increases ApoA1 by +48%: Obicetrapib on top of maximally tolerated lipid‐modifying therapies in participants with or at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: rationale and designs of BROADWAY and BROOKLYN 2024
The BROADWAY phase 3 RCT with 2,600 patients will look at apoE phenotype and AD biomarkers: topline results in the next few weeks, full results next year: x.com 
5 Likes
Is this indeed good news for everyone? Quite a few of us have already high or very high HDL/ ApoA1. When I get my lipid panel done, they have a range of 104 - 202 mg/dL. I’m already right at the upper limit. I don’t need it raised by 48%, or any percent. That’s not “good news” in my book. If you have low(ish) values, great, but if not, you need it as much as you need more salt water while drowning in the ocean. I recently switched to pitavastatin, and I like everything about it (on paper), except for one thing: it raises HDL, which the marketing pushes as one of the big plusses. Not in my book - I already have very high HDL. My very high HDL makes me uneasy, and the literature on that is not very comforting. In fact, I am going to have a comprehensive lipid panel (and liver, kidney panels) in a few months to evaluate how pitavastatin is working for me. If I see some insane HDL/ApoA1 numbers, I’m dropping it like a hot potato.
Obicetrapib may be the bee’s knees, but it may not be for everyone, and I for one don’t see this 48% raise in ApoA1 as good news, instead it triggers great concern for me. As always, YMMV.
1 Like
adssx
#94
My understand so far (I might be wrong of course):
- There’s nothing good or bad per se with high HDL and ApoA1 when it comes to arteriosclerosis. It’s perfectly neutral. This is proven by the previous CETPi trials: large HDL increase => no effect on MACE.
- But for other conditions such as Alzheimer’s, higher is better.
2 Likes
adssx
#95
More on this @CronosTempi:
Cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibition: a pathway to reducing risk of morbidity and promoting longevity 2024
Results from observational studies, Mendelian randomization analyses, and randomized clinical trials support the potential of CETP inhibition to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk through a reduction of apolipoprotein B-containing lipoproteins. In contrast, raising high-density lipoprotein (HDL) particles, as previously hypothesized, did not contribute to ASCVD risk reduction. There is also an expanding body of evidence supporting the benefits of CETP inhibition for safeguarding against other conditions associated with aging, particularly new-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus and dementia, as well as age-related macular degeneration, septicemia, and possibly chronic kidney disease. The latter are likely mediated through improved functionality of the HDL particle, including its role on cholesterol efflux and antioxidative, anti-inflammatory, and antimicrobial activities.
So:
- ApoB and LDL: the lower the better for ASCVD risk reduction
- ApoA1 and HDL: the higher the better for diabetes, dementia, macular degeneration, septicemia, and CKD
?
2 Likes
The high/extremely high HDL is a can of worms, as even a brief trip through pubmed demonstrates. I get one of those “evaluation” lipid panels, where they break down all the elements and comment on the health implications based upon the statistics they have from the population that uses their labs (which is different from ranges that are simply based on 95% of the population). Based on that, they established the 202mg/dL ApoA1 as the upper limit beyond which they saw negative effects in their test population - what those are, I don’t know, but it’s not exactly comforting. We do know, that other efforts to raise HDL were not good, and while I understand that the mechanism of raising was the issue, the high HDL was nonetheless not protective. I suppose I should dig into pubmed wrt. high HDL, but it’s overwhelming at the moment, maybe later with more time, but even so I don’t think the issue is anywhere close to being definitively settled.
adssx
#97
I think the issue is settled: the large CETPi trials had a massive HDL increase but no effect on MACE. Mendelian randomization studies are also neutral. So… Nothing to see.
2 Likes
adssx
#98
Do they provide a source for the upper ApoA1 range? If not: BS => trash 
Serum apolipoproteins and mortality risk: evidence from observational and Mendelian randomization analyses 2024
Furthermore, both observational and MR analyses found an inverse association between APOA1 and lung cancer–related mortality (HR comparing extreme deciles: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.26, 0.80; and HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.63, 0.97, respectively).
Our findings indicate that circulating APOA1 has potential beneficial effects on all-cause, CVD-related, and lung cancer–related death risk, whereas APOB may confer detrimental effects on all-cause and CVD-related death risk.
Lucky you!
1 Like
ng0rge
#99
I would watch the segment here of 10-15 minutes starting at the 1 hour mark. Thomas Dayspring covers this issue pretty well. There are some potential problems with high HDL, but ApoA1 and HDL don’t always correlate 1 to 1 because there can be many ApoA1s on one HDL particle. ApoA1 can be beneficial for dementia whereas high HDL, not always. Also they talk of obicetrapid.
Revolutionizing Brain Health: Genetics, Lipid Science, and Cutting-Edge Dementia Prevention
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vagLQumiM4
2 Likes
Neo
#100
Just have to mention that this was an amazing conversation about CETP and how Obicetrapib might become a truly massive hit should the Phase 3 trials replicate the effects seen in Phase 2 trials.
One of the best conversations Peter has ever had on the Drive Podcast in my view
3 Likes
adssx
#101
Their November corporate presentation that we’ve already discussed also has interesting slides about AD:
Uploading: image.png(1)…
Obicetrapib might soon be part of the preventive neurology regimen @DrFraser!
4 Likes
I’ll keep an eye on this one and see if there is further data.
When I see something new, I always look at is this available and if so at what cost?
I see from DCChemicals.com 250 mg for $1200 and 1000 mg for $2600. So $26 per day.
Not ready to jump on this yet.
4 Likes
AnUser
#103
Website is updated with new design and content, for new people:
The one year — apparently final — results of the BROOKLYN Phase 3 trial are even better than the interim data:
Phase 3 BROOKLYN Trial Results
The BROOKLYN trial met its primary endpoint, achieving an LS mean reduction of 36.3% (p < 0.0001) compared to placebo at day 84, which was sustained at day 365 with an LS mean LDL-C reduction of 41.5% (p < 0.0001). Secondary efficacy endpoints, including lipoprotein(a) (“Lp(a)”), which was 45.9% (p<0.0001) compared to placebo at day 84 and 54.3% (p=0.16) at day 365, apolipoprotein B (“ApoB”), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (“HDL-C”) and non-HDL-C met statistical significance and results were consistent with data reported from NewAmsterdam’s prior clinical trials. The p-value for the LS mean for all secondary endpoints compared to placebo was <0.0001 following 84 days of treatment with obicetrapib.
Obicetrapib was observed to be well tolerated, with safety results comparable to placebo and no increase in blood pressure. The treatment discontinuation rate for the obicetrapib arm was 7.6% versus 14.4% for placebo. Adverse events of special interest are summarized in the table below.
8 Likes
The news keeps getting better. I can’t wait for the generic to arrive! 
2 Likes
adssx
#106
Hopefully approval soon! Otherwise we’ll have to wait for the MACE results.
3 Likes
