- LOGIN
- MemberShip
- 2026-03-10 05:41:45
- Opinion
- [Reporter's view] Hemophilia drug war of nerves
- by Kim, Jin-Gu Aug 24, 2023 05:46am
- GC Pharma snipes JW Pharmaceutical. Hemlibra, a hemophilia treatment that JW Pharmaceutical is introducing and selling in Korea, became the target. GC Pharma distributed a press release on the 21st. It is a press release titled, 'The report rate of abnormal blood clots in Hemlibra was 2.8 times higher than Factor XIII.' This press release was written based on the information presented at the American Society for Bleeding Disorders Conference. Based on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) adverse event reporting system, JW Pharma's Hemlibra and GC Pharma's XIII formulation were compared. As a result, Hemlibra's thrombotic adverse event reporting rate was 4.07%, which was 2.83 times higher than Factor XIII's 1.44%. it was the content. It is unusual. It is true that cases of sending a press release directly mentioning and comparing competing drugs to the company's official e-mail address were rare, except for a few biopharmaceutical companies. In the biopharmaceutical industry, rather than directly mentioning the product name of a competing drug, it used to be expressed in terms of ingredient names. It was read with the intention of highlighting the side effects of competing drugs and finding fault with them, rather than revealing the advantages of the company's products and comparing them with competing drugs. Moreover, it was completely omitted from the press release that GC Pharma's Factor XIII drug showed a higher number of total adverse event reports and serious adverse event reports in the same data. There are many cases in which the pharmaceutical industry directly compares two drugs. However, this is based on the results obtained through elaborately designed clinical trials. This is because there are many external variables to evaluate the superiority or inferiority of the two drugs based on the simple reporting rate, as in the GC Pharma press release. JW Pharma expressed strong displeasure. In a separate statement, he said, "I am very sorry for the act of officially disparaging a competitor's drug." GC Pharma responded, saying, “There is no intention to disparage,” and that it was “to monitor the side effects of blood clots.” The dominant evaluation is that GC Pharma did something useless over the untimely war of nerves between the two companies. GC Pharma already dominates the domestic hemophilia treatment market through the Korea Hemophilia Foundation. There is no need to distribute press releases with poor comparison results. You just need to confidently compete with clinical data and sales power. Rather, there are opinions that this press release had an adverse effect. This is because the awareness of Hemlibra has increased as a result of this nerve war. At the same time, with Hemlibra accelerating its pursuit, GC Pharma has admitted to being nervous.
- Opinion
- [Reporter's view] There should be no recurrence of the Champ
- by Lee, Hye-Kyung Aug 17, 2023 05:29am
- On the 10th, the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety lifted the suspension of manufacturing and sales of Dong-A Pharmaceutical's Champ Syrup and Daewon Pharmaceutical's Coldaewon Kidsfen Syrup. Champ Syrup, which represents children's antipyretics containing acetaminophen, was produced and distributed again in 128 days, and Coldaewon Kidsfen Syrup in 85 days. Dong-A issued a recall order four times on April 25th, April 28th, and May 31st, starting with the recall of commercially distributed products due to 'concern about unsuitable quality (characteristics, microbial limit) on April 4th. On the other hand, Daewon Pharmaceutical recalled business operators for commercially available products as a precautionary measure following the phase separation phenomenon (concern) on May 18. Although the reasons for the recall of the two items are different, it is unknown when and how the order to recall and destroy the drug will occur. First, Champ Syrup, which had been recalled, went through the return and refund process through pharmacies and online. In addition, when a customer brings a product to a pharmacy, even in the case of products purchased at other pharmacies, normal product exchange or return and refund measures are to be carried out first. Suffering from the Champ Syrup recall process became the pharmacy distributing the product. Perhaps for this reason, Daewon Pharmaceutical, which was advised to recall the business operator, went through the process of returning and refunding the drug directly to the pharmaceutical company without going through the pharmacy. Of course, there was also Coldaewon Kidsfen Syrup, which was confused with Champ Syrup and brought to pharmacies, but pharmacies did not have to accept the product. Champ Syrup and Coldaewon Kidsfen Syrup, which had been discontinued for nearly three months, were canceled at the same time, and it was the pharmacy that was confused again. This is because it was not easy to order antipyretics for children whose production was resumed due to sales at specific hours and restrictions on the number of purchases per pharmacy. As Champ Syrup and Coldaewon Kidsfen Syrup went through a series of incidents such as manufacturing, suspension, and cancellation, pharmaceutical companies were insufficiently prepared to resume distribution due to inconsistent recall procedures and the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety's unilateral cancellation of manufacturing/suspension. Looking at this process, there is a need for support measures such as preparing a consistent procedure for recalls of business operators rather than compulsory recalls in the future and providing time to prepare for preparations such as pre-announcement by pharmaceutical companies in case of the lifting of manufacturing or suspension of drugs with issues such as supply and demand instability. seems to be
- Opinion
- [Reporter's view] Fight between AZ/Janssen
- by Jung, Sae-Im Aug 17, 2023 05:29am
- Since the discovery of EGFR gene mutation in non-small cell lung cancer patients in 2004, EGFR-targeted anti-cancer drugs have made remarkable progress over the past 20 years. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting this genetic mutation have been established as standard therapy through the first generation (Iressa), second generation (Giotrif ·Vizimpro), and third generation (Tagrisso). Among them, Tagrisso is currently the only third-generation EGFR-TKI in the global market and has maintained its top position for more than five years without any competing drugs. The strength of Tagrisso is that it shows better effects than the first and second generations, especially in brain metastasis, which lung cancer patients often experience. Lung cancer is one of the most diagnosed cancers in the world, and EGFR is a major mutation in lung cancer, so global pharmaceutical companies are interested in it. For this reason, pharmaceutical companies have measured the effect of EGFR mutations with various new drugs, and immuno-anticancer drugs are representative. Immunotherapy has changed the paradigm of lung cancer treatment and brought about groundbreaking results. However, even this was not as effective as expected in patients with EGFR mutations. Only the recognition that EGFR-mutated lung cancer should be treated with targeted anticancer drugs has become more solid. Since then, the attention of pharmaceutical companies has been focused on 'Next Tagrisso'. AstraZeneca is betting on combination therapy using Tagrisso to protect its status, while competitors are betting on a combination therapy that has developed a new drug with a new mechanism. In the second half of this year, a true swordsman battle will unfold between those who want to protect and those who challenge. AstraZeneca plans to present the results of the FLAURA2 study, a phase 3 clinical trial comparing Tagrisso with chemotherapy alone, at the World Lung Cancer Society in September. In October, Janssen will present at the European Society of Oncology (ESMO) the results of a phase 3 clinical MARIPOSA study comparing Rybrevant, an anti-cancer drug targeting EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation, and Leclaza, an EGFR-targeting anti-cancer drug introduced from Yuhan Corporation, compared to Tagrisso. Currently, the two clinical trials that are directly compared with Tagrisso, the global first-line standard therapy, are both trying to change the standard treatment. Of course, it was Janssen who had a greater ripple effect in case of success. This is because it combines a TKI with a new mechanism called Rybrevant and a TKI similar to Tagrisso. Global market research firm 'Evaluate Vantage' explained the market value of the two studies earlier this year, "The MARIPOSA study has two chances to beat Tagrisso by comparing Rybrevant + Leclaza combination therapy and Leclaza monotherapy, respectively, with Tagrisso." did. The market research firm also commented, "Given the advantages MARIPOSA holds, the results of the FLAURA2 study may reduce the threat of Leclaza, but may not completely eliminate it." While AstraZeneca has already announced that it has demonstrated improvement in the primary endpoint in the FLAURA2 study, the market is paying keen attention to how much improvement Tagrisso + chemotherapy would have shown, and how the results of the MARIPOSA study, which are still veiled, will come out. It is very likely that standard treatment options will increase in EGFR-mutated lung cancer. This means that the patient's prognosis will be further improved. In addition, within EGFR, customized treatment may be possible depending on the subtype and health condition. This is good news for Korea, which has a high proportion of EGFR mutations. So, the results of the second half are expected.
- Opinion
- [Reporter's view] Prompt benefit registration
- by Eo, Yun-Ho Aug 10, 2023 05:33am
- These days, the word 'expedited' appears frequently in the reform of the insurance benefit system. The plan is to speed up the listing of necessary new drugs by linking approval, and evaluation, and shortening the listing period at each stage. This is a good intention to quickly expand drug coverage for patients who are waiting. Shortening the insurance benefit registration period for pharmaceuticals has been discussed almost every year, and in fact, the regulatory period is getting shorter and shorter. Both the HIRA and the NHIS' evaluation and negotiation phases are similar. However, it is only a deadline for pharmaceutical companies to apply and review them. First of all, not a few pharmaceutical companies spend a considerable amount of time in the process of obtaining approval from the head office and requesting actual reimbursement. In other words, they are thoroughly flirting with an idea. If the registration process of drugs that have long passed the review period is traced back, there are many cases in which the Subcommittee on Drug Reimbursement Standards voluntarily withdraws after the decision to delay the review. However, there are many cases where this voluntary withdrawal is not 'voluntary'. In drug price negotiations between the NHIS and pharmaceutical companies, delayed decisions are made as if they were eating rice. The 60-day negotiation period is a promise. While announcing a proposal to shorten the deadline for domestically produced new drugs, is called a 'benefit'. However, there is no transparency in this whole process of the NHIS and the HIRA. Before simply promoting 'speed', concerns about transparency should be added. Just as the results of the Pharmaceutical Reimbursement Evaluation Committee and the Cancer Disease Review Committee were switched from non-disclosure to disclosure, discussions on the disclosure of information as much as possible in the new drug reimbursement process are now necessary. If drug price negotiations break down and additional disclosure of drugs that have been delayed after the application for reimbursement is made, the predictability of those waiting and watching will increase, which will lead to the establishment of effectiveness in shortening the evaluation period.
- Opinion
- [Reporter's view] When will Enhertu's benefit be available?
- by Jul 31, 2023 05:29am
- Daiichi Sankyo and AstraZeneca's Enhertu are continuing their unstoppable moves. Enhertu, which has achieved remarkable results in breast cancer, has expanded the types of carcinoma to include gastric cancer and lung cancer and is expected to be used in a number of solid cancers that show HER2 expression, such as cervical cancer, endometrial cancer, and ovarian cancer. Several ADCs have been approved, but none have been as scalable as Enhertu. Indeed, Enhertu is writing ADC history. The phase 2 results for Enhertu announced at ASCO 2023 in June were very positive. Although it was not at a stage that deserved a standing ovation like last year's announcement of low-expression breast cancer of HER2, this announcement raises the possibility that Enhertu will be reborn as an anti-cancer drug regardless of cancer type. The Enhertu DESTINY-PanTumor02 clinical trial announced at ASCO was a study that examined the effects of Enhertu by forming a cohort of cervical cancer, endometrial cancer, ovarian cancer, bile duct cancer, pancreatic cancer, bladder cancer, and other solid cancers without a control group. For each cohort, 40 patients were recruited and Enhertu was administered. ORR was set as the primary evaluation index, and DOR, DCR, PFS, OS, and safety were established as secondary evaluation indexes. What is noteworthy is the response rate that Enhertu showed. It recorded a response rate of 50% or more in cervical cancer and endometrial cancer. In particular, the response rate for endometrial cancer reached 57.5%. Seven out of 40 endometrial cancer patients (17.5%) showed complete remission (CR) and 16 (40%) showed partial response (PR). At 12 weeks, 80% (32 patients) of endometrial cancer patients had their disease under control. In conclusion, Enhertu recorded a response rate of 30% or more in all cancer types studied, except for pancreatic cancer, which had a response rate of only 4%, and biliary tract cancer, which had a relatively low response rate of 22%. About a month later, on the 27th, additional analysis results of DESTINY-PanTumor02 were announced. In summary, Enhertu demonstrated improvement in PFS and OS, which were set as secondary evaluation indicators. Follow-up clinical trials should be supported, but it is clear that Enhertu is rapidly taking off as an anti-cancer drug regardless of cancer type. Domestic patients looking at Enhertu's rapid development were very distressed. Although approved, access to treatment is low due to non-reimbursement. Enhertu is an oasis for patients not only in breast cancer but also in gastric cancer where new drug options are limited. Daiichi Sankyo's commitment to Enhertu's fast benefit was also quite large. It is known that several measures were prepared, such as offering the drug price at the lowest price in the world and considering additional RSA. Patients urged Enhertu's speedy reimbursement listing. The national consent petition for this was so supportive that it obtained the consent of 50,000 people last February. The health authorities seem to be paying attention to Enhertu's benefit, as if conscious of public opinion. It can be seen from the fact that even when the review committee was first eliminated, it was concluded through a re-examination rather than not setting a standard. Considering the time it takes for a new drug to be registered for reimbursement in Korea, Enhertu's reimbursement process is fast. Currently, Enhertu has passed the cancer disease review committee after re-examination and is undergoing a PE review. However, it is unclear when it will be presented to the pharmaceutical reimbursement evaluation committee, which is in the final stage. Patients are anxiously awaiting news of the assumption. In about two months, it will be a year since Enhertu was approved in Korea. Even after passing the Drug Evaluation Committee, all procedures for insurance coverage are completed only after drug price negotiations with the NHIS and the health insurance policy deliberation committee of the Ministry of Health and Welfare. By the end of the year, after Enhertu's first global launch, it will take 48 months to receive benefits in Korea, exceeding the OECD average of 45 months. We hope that patients' wait for Enhertu will not be too long.
- Opinion
- [Reporter's view] A groundbreaking policy is needed
- by Lee, Tak-Sun Jul 24, 2023 05:26am
- Controversy is in full swing over Madopar, a Parkinson's disease drug that withdrew from the Korean market early this year due to profitability issues. Patients want Madopar again, saying that the only remaining generic drug after Madopar was withdrawn has severe side effects. Furthermore, it raises the question of calculating the drug price of the original drug. First of all, the government extended the grace period for Madopar's insurance benefit deletion from July 31st to December 31st. During this period, benefits can be applied even if Madopar is prescribed in stock. However, extending the grace period is only a short-term solution. After December 31st, it is clear that patients' dissatisfaction will increase. Accordingly, some are discussing ways to recall Madopar within the current drug pricing policy. It is said that the upper limit amount will be raised through the drug ceiling amount adjustment system so that the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety must obtain re-permission. The Ministry of Health and Welfare also said that it would speed up the related procedures if it applied for reimbursement after re-permission by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. But even this is not a fundamental solution. In the future, such a situation may arise again in the market where the original is withdrawn and only the generic remains. This has a problem in that it is difficult to maintain order in the drug price system, and above all, it can further accelerate distrust of generic drugs. We need the best way to calm patients' dissatisfaction right away, but we also need to come up with measures to cut off distrust of generics in the long term. If patients cannot trust generics because of side effects, health authorities should consider verifying their effectiveness through various data and patient interviews. Through this, it is necessary to verify whether some side effects are inflated or whether side effects actually appear only in generic drugs. If side effects appear only in generic drugs, the background should be found and reflected in the improvement of the approval system. This is because the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety may miss something just by verifying the equivalence of drug efficacy. The measures currently put forward by the authorities are only short-term prescriptions aimed at calming patients and public opinion. Even if things become complicated, we must take a broader perspective and respond preemptively. That's the only way for generic trust.
- Opinion
- [Reporter's view]Time to think about price by indication
- by Eo, Yun-Ho Jul 19, 2023 05:20am
- Now is the time to think. The increasing number of non-insured indications and the steadily increasing number of indications for new drugs have now become quite a big snowball. In an age when a single drug has multiple indications and is used for multiple diseases, the emergence of drugs that target specific gene mutations and further activate the immune system itself has made it possible to focus on the mechanism, not the disease, and apply its efficacy to a wide range. The domestic drug price system, which has a mechanism of decreasing as the amount of use, that is, increases, makes negotiations between the government and pharmaceutical companies lengthy, and patients wait longer. How should we accept the existence of 'drugs that some people use and others can't' and the 'drug prices by indication' that are discussed along with them? 'Drug price by indication' is a method of setting drug prices separately according to the innovativeness of each indication, reflecting the current situation in which a drug is approved for various indications. KRPIA, a representative organization of multinational pharmaceutical companies, has already insisted on the necessity of introducing drug prices by indication several years ago. However, the government was closer to a stronger 'No' than 'I will review'. The problem is that there has been only the answer that it is difficult, but there is no alternative so far. Not long ago, the immune anti-cancer drug 'Keytruda' became a hot topic by submitting an application for insurance benefit registration for as many as 13 indications at once. In other words, 13 indications of cutting-edge new drugs called immuno-anticancer drugs were not actually being prescribed. In Korea's billing system, tracking by indication is difficult, and it may be difficult for patients to accept paying different amounts depending on the disease. However, it is also true that drugs that are clearly useful are not being used for the right patients. First of all, it is important to start a discussion in some way. Even after only 3 to 5 years, the problem of expanding indications for new drugs and accessibility to them will inevitably emerge much more than now. It does not have to be a differential application of refund rates or drug prices for each indication. It's time to put our heads together to find an alternative.
- Opinion
- [Reporter’s View]Kudos to Keytruda for filing 13 reimb apps
- by Eo, Yun-Ho Jul 05, 2023 05:45am
- A truly extraordinary case has emerged. MSD Korea has applied for the reimbursement of 13 Keytruda indications at once. This is an unprecedented event, the first time such a large amount of applications had been filed for a single drug since the positive list system was implemented for drug reimbursement in Korea. After submitting the applications, MSD explained “Cancer is in itself an aggressive and life-threatening condition, and we saw that there was a dire need for improved access to Keytruda in the field due to the lack of alternatives or reimbursed latest treatment options. To address the need, the company decided to apply for the extended reimbursement of Keytruda to cover indications with high clinical need or reimbursement. We seek to improve treatment access to all patients that can benefit from Keytruda.” We should first applaud the company for its effort. Considering the rising number of non-reimbursed immuno-oncology drug indications piling up in the field, MSD duly served its mission as a pharmaceutical company by applying for the reimbursements, regardless of success or failure. Keytruda is currently reimbursed for 7 indications in 4 cancer types in Korea. Applying for the reimbursement of 13 indications is not an easy task. As a drug under the Risk Sharing Agreement scheme, its each and every indication must undergo an evaluation process comparable to that of a new drug to extend reimbursement. Pharmacoeconomic evaluations must be performed for indications that were approved based on a Phase III trial to demonstrate cost-effectiveness, and those approved based on a Phase II trial must undergo negotiations to receive pharmacoeconomic evaluation waivers. The relevant health authorities including the Ministry of Health and Welfare and the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service also have a lot on their hand as they must concurrently evaluate numerous indications of a single drug. Therefore, the reimbursement extension process will also require considerable effort on the government’s part. Considering how this is an unprecedented situation and that the pharmaceutical companies would not have applied for the reimbursement of 13 indications without prior discussion with the government, anticipation is rising on how the results will turn out for Keytruda. In an era where a single drug owns multiple indications, I hope Keytruda’s case will set a milestone and serve to resolve the rising issues in Korea’s reimbursement extension process. Meanwhile, the 13 indications Keytruda applied for were: ▲ early-stage triple-negative breast cancer; ▲locally recurrent or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, ▲metastatic or with unresectable, recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, ▲ locally advanced or metastatic esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) carcinoma, ▲adjuvant treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma, ▲non-muscle invasive bladder cancer, ▲persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer, ▲ advanced endometrial carcinoma, ▲metastatic endometrial carcinoma that is microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) or mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) ▲ unresectable or metastatic MSI-H or dMMR colorectal cancer ▲metastatic MSI-H or dMMR small bowel cancer, ▲ metastatic MSI-H or dMMR ovarian cancer, and ▲ metastatic MSI-H or dMMR pancreatic cancer.
- Opinion
- [Reporter’s View] Gvn't policies hinder KOR pharma growth
- by Lee, Tak-Sun Jul 04, 2023 05:37am
- It seems that the pro-business policy the new administration has been implementing to promote Korea’s industries is not benefiting the domestic pharmaceutical companies at all. Rather, the companies have expressed their regrets on how the authorities have been implementing policies that hinder their corporate activities, such as those that lower generic drug prices. Although the policy to reduce the price of generics has not been implemented yet, the industry believes the policy will surface with the release of the 2nd Comprehensive National Health Insurance Plan in the second half of this year. In particular, the drug price-reducing policy is expected to come to the fore because Professor Jinhyun from Seoul National University who has been at the forefront in arguing for generic drug price reductions, has been appointed the joint head of the 2nd Comprehensive National Health Insurance Plan Promotion Team with Korea’s 2nd Vice-Minister of Health and Welfare, Minsoo Park. Therefore, the industry also expressed concerns about the rumors that Vice Minister Park is revamping the drug pricing system to reduce the number of generic items on the market. All in all, it seems that a series of policies unfavorable to domestic pharmaceutical companies will be introduced to Korea in the near future, along with the reorganization of the generic drug pricing system, the complete revision of the actual transaction price discount system, and comparison with overseas generic drug prices. Therefore, it is only natural that domestic pharmaceutical companies are expressing their dissatisfaction regarding the changes being made. The companies have pointed out that the policies are in direct contrast to the government’s goal of becoming one of the 6 global biohealth powerhouses and developing two homegrown new blockbuster drugs that can bring in annual sales of over KRW 1 trillion in 5 years. The Korean pharmaceutical industry has constantly stressed that Korea’s generic drug industry is the driving force behind the self-sufficiency of Korea’s pharmaceutical market. Therefore, adopting a direct comparison model that compares Korea’s situation with other countries that gave way to cheap imported generics is illogical. Also, the companies implored that they cannot fund the long-term research and development required for the introduction of new blockbuster drugs if the government reduces the sales revenue from generic drugs, as it is the major driving force for R&D in most domestic pharmaceutical companies. Therefore, the Korean pharmaceutical industry plans to take action and relay its message on the need to protect the domestic industry before the government implements its generic drug price reform plan. Policies to reduce generic drug prices have been steadily proposed by every administration, regardless of their political tendencies, liberal or conservative. However, the impact made by the conservative governments has been stronger. One leading example is the lump-sum drug price cuts in 2012 made during the Lee Myung Bak administration. The industry, therefore, is more worried that the Yoon Suk Yeol administration will also come up with a policy similar to Lee’s lump sum drug price cut. Of course, the companies are also welcoming some policies that they have longed for, such as regulatory reform. However, most domestic pharmaceutical companies seem to believe that the positive effects of other policies are offset by the generic drug price cut that will inevitably affect most pharmaceutical companies. The Korean pharmaceutical industry is not understanding why the government is so obsessed with measures to reduce Korea’s drug use volume and generic drug prices. One official emphasized, “The company needs to first do well for it to pay the corporate taxes and contribute to the national wealth. However, domestic pharmaceutical companies are applied the lowest rate for corporate taxes due to low revenue. In this context, are policies that further reduce profit really right and necessary? With pharmaceutical companies that have no money to pay corporate taxes, and the unwavering government pushing to cut their profits, this reporter must ask, are pharmaceutical companies included in the government’s business-friendly policies?
- Opinion
- [Reporter's view] Signs of concern about the Saxenda craze
- by Jun 29, 2023 05:56am
- Five years ago, there was a Saxenda craze in Korea. People rushed to the clinics because they could easily lose weight with self-injection once a day at home, and there were no central nervous system side effects, unlike existing obesity drugs, which are psychotropic drugs. The saying, 'There is no one in Gangnam who does not take Saxenda' was circulating like a trend. Health authorities also launched an intensive crackdown on the indiscriminate use of Saxenda, but the effectiveness was temporary. Saxenda posted record sales of 42.6 billion won in the second year of domestic launch. As of 2023, the diet pill craze is showing signs of spreading once again. This is when the next-generation version of Saxenda appears. Novo Nordisk, which created Saxenda, introduced an injection that is more convenient and more effective for weight loss than Saxenda. Unlike Saxenda, which needs to be injected once daily, the new Wegovy only needs to be injected once a week. Patients participating in the trial lost an average of 15% of their body weight. Following the news that Lilly's 'Mounjaro', which is said to have the most powerful weight loss effect, was soon approved in Korea, people's expectations have risen to the peak. In the United States, Tesla CEO Elon Musk and the influencer Kardashian sisters revealed that they succeeded in dieting with these injections, causing a 'shortage phenomenon'. It is currently impossible to obtain these injections in Korea. Wegovy has been approved in Korea, but the domestic release date is undecided due to a lack of supply worldwide. There is a high possibility that it will be difficult to release within the year. As the situation is like this, some people are turning their eyes to overseas direct purchases. It is also illegally purchasing diabetes medications made with the same ingredients as oral medications, not Wegovy. In fact, this drug is for diabetes treatment, and the dose is one-third, so the purchase is pointless, but illegal purchases are not going away. Because news praising the effectiveness of a new anti-obesity treatment is pouring in every day, the targets for which this drug can be used or its side effects are often not mentioned or forgotten. The focus is on just how much weight you lose. First, in the United States, where the craze took place, purchasing and taking Wegovy raw materials at random has emerged as a social problem. Korea, where Wegovy will be released in the future, will not be an exception. In order to receive a prescription for injections, it may be common to run 'open runs' in hospitals or engage in illegal transactions by paying a higher price. There is a high risk that exaggerated advertisements using people's desire to buy will also pour out. These are examples that have already appeared in the Saxenda craze. Preemptive efforts are needed to prevent indiscriminate abuse of obesity drugs. When this drug can be used and when it should not be used, side effect information should be clearly communicated and safe usage instructions should be provided. It is also necessary to pay close attention to the overuse of exaggerated advertisements by some hospitals. There is something we should also remember. A new drug that claims to have lost more than 10 kg, it is difficult to expect such an effect if the participating patients are all overweight and obese and their body mass index (BMI) is less than 30 kg/m2. At the time of the clinical trial, the patients controlled their diet and exercised together. In the end, medicine is the only medicine, and in the end, if you do not continue to control your diet and exercise appropriately, weight loss is only temporary.
