MULTAQ

I find Hans Larsen's heavy criticism of MULTAQ to be unwarranted and overdone. There are a growing number of top professionals who recommend MULTAQ highly for lone afibbers with no liver problems for two reasons:

1) It decreases the likelihood of another attack

2) If you have one, it decreases its severity

They feel that it is the best drug available under the circumstances mentioned above. After two outbreaks of lone afib in four years, caused in both cases by electrolytic imbalance and dehydration, I have been on it since my second incident in May 2011 and have found it absolutely benign and have furthermore had no recurrence.

Robert - It's not just Hans giving the criticism or warning.

Drugs may be a necessary evil as they all have some degree of adverse effect but it makes no sense to use one that has had published warnings when there are so many that seem to work fairly well for many people Why tempt fate?

This is one of many similar articles posted here not long ago.\

European Medicines Agency Recommends Restricting Use of Dronedarone

LONDON -- September 22, 2011 -- The European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) has recommended restricting the use of dronedarone (Multaq).

The anti-arrhythmic medicine should only be prescribed for maintaining heart rhythm in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation for the maintenance of sinus rhythm after successful cardioversion.

Due to an increased risk of liver, lung, and cardiovascular adverse events, dronedarone should only be prescribed after alternative treatment options have been considered.

Be sure to read the entire article.
[www.docguide.com]

Jackie

Bull! It hasn't done a damn thing for me except drain my bank account.

Robert, why do you not use the search function here, put in the name multaq, and read posts from people who have taken this drug, and get firsthand reports about its efficacy? It is good to read reports from doctors and scientists about the drugs we use, but i think it is better to read reports from actual afibbers who have taken the drugs themselves. Another good thing about reading posts here from actual afibbers, you can email most of the people who post here and ask them any questions you may have about their experiences with this and other drugs. Anybody whose name appears at the top of their post in blue letters, the way mine and yours do, you can email that person privately and talk with them that way.

PeggyM

In the latest online email news from theheart.org, they have an editorial segment titled “All about dronedarone, from ATHENA to PALLAS”

which includes referenced study reviews which should be useful if you are on this drug or are considering taking it.


January 6, 2012
Recorded: November 15, 2011

The results of the PALLAS study presented at the American Heart Association 2011 Scientific Sessions are the latest chapter for the antiarrhythmic agent dronedarone. The study, which tested dronedarone in high-CV-risk patients with permanent atrial fibrillation, was stopped early due to an increase in cardiovascular events seen in patients randomized to dronedarone.

The study data, now detailed in the New England Journal of Medicine, show that the dronedarone-related CV events over a median follow-up of 3.5 months consisted largely of stroke, heart failure, CV death, and arrhythmic death. Those events contributed to significant increases, by a factor of about two, in the trial's pair of co–primary end points: stroke, MI, systemic embolism, or CV death; and death or unplanned CV hospitalization.

The findings are in contrast to those of the ATHENA trial, which included somewhat lower-CV-risk patients with recent paroxysmal or intermittent AF and had a 24% drop in the primary end point of death or CV hospitalization over 21 months. ATHENA was the basis for the FDA approval of dronedarone in July 2009.

Dr Melissa Walton-Shirley sits down with the Heart Rhythm Society's president-elect Dr Anne Gillis to talk about this new information and what it means for the future of dronedarone in the world of atrial fibrillation.

Related Links:
•FDA puts new warnings on dronedarone
[Clinical Conditions > Arrhythmia/EP; Dec 19, 2011]
•PALLAS: Dronedarone a hazard in high-CV-risk patients with permanent AF
[Clinical Conditions > Arrhythmia/EP; Nov 14, 2011]
•EMA recommends restricting use of dronedarone
[Arrhythmia/EP > Arrhythmia/EP; Sep 22, 2011]
•Dronedarone "dear doctor" letter sums up recent alerts
[Arrhythmia/EP > Arrhythmia/EP; Aug 17, 2011]
•Deaths doubled with dronedarone in PALLAS: FDA and EMA updates
[Arrhythmia/EP > Arrhythmia/EP; Jul 21, 2011]
•Dronedarone trial suspended due to CV events in permanent atrial fibrillation
[Arrhythmia/EP > Arrhythmia/EP; Jul 07, 2011]
•RACE-2: "Lenient" rate control for AF doesn't compromise quality of life
[Clinical Conditions > Arrhythmia/EP; May 17, 2010]
•FDA approves dronedarone for atrial fibrillation
[Arrhythmia/EP > Arrhythmia/EP; Jul 02, 2009]
•ATHENA data suggest dronedarone for AF is safe in stable heart failure
[Arrhythmia/EP > Arrhythmia/EP; May 16, 2009]

I don't remember Hans being biased against Multaq. What I do remember was the paper in the NJM with data on chronic affibers and it was terrible in comparison to placebo. The whole concept for Multaq is that it is less toxic than Amio but also less effective. Some people can handle Amio and some will also be able to handle Multaq. Neither are meant to be long term solutions to AF. Eventually, the toxicity will get to you. The drug maker has oversold the lower toxicity aspect as liver complication reports are piling up and the FDA issued additional label warnings.

Robert,

My thoughts....

In January 2010 started Rythmol on a daily basis (prior to that time used as a "pill in the pocket"). At this point, quite frankly believe I experienced every listed side affect of the medication and would have preferred atrial fibrillation to how the medication made me feel. In May switched to Multaq.....whle Multaq did not completely elimimate the atrial fibrillation, experienced very minimal side affects and it seemed to control my arrhythmia better that Rythmol.

During this time the issues with Multaq surfaced and I discusssed with my EP cardiologist in Houston.....his opinion was that we continue Multaq but monitor my liver functions. I have taken prescription anti-inflammatory medication for many, many years and consequently have my liver functions tested on an on-going basis as NSAIDs have an impact on the liver as well.

Because I did not want to be required to take anti-arrythmic mediation long-term I gradually began to reconsider my viewpoint in reference to an ablation and met with Natale in November to discuss the procedure. His comments in reference to Multaq......I was one of the few that had success with Multaq; would not recommend that I stop and switch to another medication as the next option is also very toxic (stated that all anti-arrhthmic medication is toxic); and that Multaq is definitely a problem for anyone with existing liver issues.

Ulitmately I opted for an ablation with Natale and fortunately have stopped all anti-arrhythmic medication since the procedure in March of last year.



Steve
Spring, Tx.

I have been taking Multaq since November 2010 and it is working very well for me. I hardly even remember that I have afib. I was previously on Metoprolol, which did nothing. My heart seemed to be pounding all the time! I have been cutting the dosage in half for some time -- taking half in the morning and half at night instead of the full a.m. and p.m dosages. That also seems to work. I am 62 and was diagnosed with LAF in March of 2010. I am also on Pradaxa and have had no side affects -- although my 92 year-old mother was on it for awhile and it did cause stomach bleeding so she had to back on Coumadin.