FINALLY There Appears Some Hope For Strontium In The US - Osteoporosis Message Board

CrohnieToo · 11-06-2007, 05:21 AM

Osteologix is a company w/offices in San Francisco, CA "and" they are involved in the development of Strontium Manolate (NB S101)for osteoporosis. Their 12 weeks phase II STRONG study with 289 postmenopausal women compared 3 dosage levels of strontium manolate w/one dosage level of strontium ranelate (Protelos). There were no significant differences in the side effect profiles between the four treatment groups and comparable or improved results.

Osteologix’ plans for Phase 3 clinical trials and possible regulatory approvals of NB S101. More importantly, Osteologix filed Form 10-KSB with the USA's Securities Exchange Commission on March 27, 2007 which is available from the SEC's website!!!

Possible side effects:
Nausea - Diarrhea - Headache - Eczema - Blood clots in the blood vessels (venous thromboembolism, eg deep vein thrombosis) - Fainting - Memory loss - Seizures

osteoblast · 11-06-2007, 12:24 PM

What I don't get is why they don't just allow strontium ranelate to be sold in the US. Wouldn't that get a prescription strontium to osteo sufferers sooner than the strontium malonate. I am not saying that they shouldn't proceed with strontium malonate, but why can't the fda allow the strontium ranelate that is sold in europe? Inquiring minds want to know.

montesflus · 11-06-2007, 06:55 PM

Yes, I bet inquiring minds want to know. I want to know, too!

It's probably got something to do with money - profits, and the like. Since Fosamax, Actonel and Boniva have been SO heavily marketed here in the US, the pharmaceutical companies probably aren't too keen on competition and a loss of revenue. Still, what I can't fathom, is why on earth can't these pharmaceutical companies manufacture their own version of Strontium Ranelate, here in the US?

osteoblast · 11-06-2007, 11:15 PM

I have heard that in the AIDS community that they lobby Congress and the pharmaceutical companies -pushing and prodding for new treatments etc.
Is this what has to be done for Americans to get the drug companies to offer an alternative that has met regulatory approval in Europe. There are so many people it seems who have trouble with the bisphosphonates that you would think doctors who are involved with osteoporosis would push for prescription strontium to be available here. Wrapping your mind around the why of this situation is just another one of the really hard things about having osteoporosis- at least for me. It seems like a monopoly is being exercised by the pharmaceutical companies that make the bisphosphonates.
I can remember not too long ago that the US govt said they didn't want people going into Canada to get their prescription drugs because there wouldn't be FDA inspection. Well now we hear about alot of the drugs coming in from China and that there is totally inadequate inspection. Who is the FDA protecting with these policies?

phylwill1152 · 11-07-2007, 04:37 AM

Hi everyone..these are all good arguments about the why and why not the FDA won't approve drugs already tested in Europe. My husband does fish diseses for our state and runs into the same problems with getting permission to use certain drugs to treat fish. He also deals with the FDA and the Dept. of AG and has come across the problem of drugs used on fish in Europe (that have already been tested and approved there) not being allowed here. I've seen first hand the frustration is causes and it ain't pretty...hahaha.

I too think it comes down to money...think of the money the pharmacuetical companies would lose if SR or any strontium drug became availabe here. Someone mentioned a while back that if SR did become available here that they might take OTC SC off the shelves. I don't know if this would happen or not, but its worth thinking about. While having a prescrption would be nice for those of us with insurance, if they take it off the shelves those without wouldn't be able to afford it. have a good day..take care...phyllis