If they had damaged your pancreas, you'd have become a Type 3c!@tim2000s thank you so much for the additional information. I hadn't found the Medscape paper during my search which is very useful.
I agree, I may have been T1 or T1.5 all along BUT what if these tablets damaged my pancreas and turned me from a Type 2 to a Type 1/1.5? I would think that's a possibility but don't know. I'd love to "speak" with others who have had a similar experience but I think we're (thankfully) few and far between in the UK. I know that in the US there are class actions now against the manufacturers.
I agree that it's likely you were misdiagnosed in the first place rather than it causing you to become T1 (or a T2 dependent upon insulin) Your earliest posts on here seem to show that.
In the US it seems that several of these cases were LADA or very late stage T2 (and therefore with very low insulin levels) http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/38/9/1638.full
In Japan the people who developed it (and had a recorded precipitating factor and only about half seem to have one) included people who stopped insulin (ie they were already on it) or were sick with something else or restricted calories or carbohydrates .http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jdi.12401/pdf
I can't help you with your legal question except to say that you don't have to be in the US to benefit from a class action ( I was part of one when Christies was prosecuted in the US about their buyers premium being raised in concert with Sothebys. In that case I didn't have to do anything, just got a surprise letter in the post because the lawyers got my name from the records. Several years later got a cheque for £20! ) I suspect in this case you would have to find an American lawyer who was involved in any such action.
Just out of interest - what on earth is a Type 3c???? I've never heard of that!
That's normal for most T1s, yes.My CPEP in November showed little or no insulin production by the pancreas but I'm unsure whether that's "normal" for a type 1.
There seems to be a class action in the US but nothing in the UK. Astro Zeneca are relying heavily on this drug to produce literally billions in revenue over the next 7 - 8 years.I'm interested if anybody has successfully or unsuccessfully sued a drug manufacturer in the UK?
There seems to be a class action in the US but nothing in the UK. Astro Zeneca are relying heavily on this drug to produce literally billions in revenue over the next 7 - 8 years.
I wish I could suggest something, we need something akin to the "ambulance chasers" (is that what they're called), you know, the "have you had an accident at work" merchants, to do something when and if drugs manufacturers screw up.
I'm not supporting Astro Zeneca in any way, form or manner, quite the opposite. If I hear of something in the UK like the class action in the US I'll let you know. I have a few pharmaceutical companies I'd like to sue myself.@DavidGrahamJones Astra Zeneca are an enormous company and if I'm honest, I dislike the ambulance chasers BUT I also strongly believe that products should be thoroughly tested before going to market and warnings, no matter whether a problem has been found in 1 person or 100, should be widely reported in a timely manner. I don't believe that Astra Zeneca have done that. I was exceptionally lucky but others may not be as fortunate. Drugs are a part of our lives and the manufacturers have a responsibility to the end users. I believe that (like most businesses), profit will play a big part in what happens.
I'm not supporting Astro Zeneca in any way, form or manner, quite the opposite. If I hear of something in the UK like the class action in the US I'll let you know. I have a few pharmaceutical companies I'd like to sue myself.
I'm not excusing them but this is what happens when they have to get things to market as quickly as possible because the patent life is so short, especially after clinical trials. As I say, it's not an excuse, just a fact.
. . . . . they're not interested in helping anybody in the UK
What's DKA?@Daibell, Forxiga causes Euglycaemic DKA - that's the issue, and why the FDA insisted on the labelling change.
http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm446845.htm
As you can see, it's unusual due to there not being raised glucose levels alongside the high levels of ketones. It's no longer widely recommended for prescription in England any longer due to these concerns - NICE Guideline from December 2015:
1.1 - Dapagliflozin in a dual therapy regimen in combination with metformin is recommended as an option for treating type 2 diabetes, only if:
1.2 - Dapagliflozin in combination with insulin with or without other antidiabetic drugs is recommended as an option for treating type 2 diabetes.
- a sulfonylurea is contraindicated or not tolerated or
- the person is at significant risk of hypoglycaemia or its consequences.
1.3 - Dapagliflozin in a triple therapy regimen in combination with metformin and a sulfonylurea is not recommended for treating type 2 diabetes, except as part of a clinical trial.
1.4 - People currently receiving dapagliflozin in a dual or triple therapy regimen that is not recommended for them in 1.1 or 1.3 should be able to continue treatment until they and their clinician consider it appropriate to stop.
@Michele01, as @Daibell says, you it's unlikely that you were ever T2. Although you may have been misdiagnosed as such, you are really T1/T1.5 and as a result shouldn't have been put on this drug in the first place due to the known issues.
Recent studies have shown an increase in DKA in trialling SGLT-2 Inhibitors with Type 1 diabetics (although the study method has been called into question as increasing this risk as well): http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/851309#vp_2
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?