When it comes to product inserts and drug test results for the FDA, the Cytopoint data is extremely sparse. So sparse, it’s as if they “knew someone” over at FDA and got them to wave it through the approval process with next to no testing.
Look at the product insert. They tested it, but what can you even derive and where’s the actual study or proof?
No matter: If you look for cancer and Cytopoint in the popular / social media, there’s scarcely any reference to it.
Since its release, there just isn’t much cancer, probably less than you’d get in a similar group of normal-age-breed critters.
Wouldn’t THAT be a hoot if Cytopoint REDUCED the incidence of tumors? ha ha ha ha.
In any event, Cytopoint’s working, but when it doesn’t it doesn’t AT ALL. And so I called the company veterinarians and they said and I quote: “If you correct the underlying skin disease Cytopoint should work.” which is a loaded statement because it’s predicated on the words “underlying skin disease” because the itching is the skin disease, and “should” because shouldn’t anything sold to work?
I like Cytopoint and recommend it.
But, I prepare the owner that it’s going to work, and work WELL, or it’s not going to work even a LITTLE bit. There’s something there. Like a pivotal part of the immune competence is missing.
If they’re coming straight off Apoquel (immune-suppressive) onto Cytopoint, well that much is guaranteed. Apoquel crushes the skin immune system while Cytopoint actually DEPENDS on it to work.