Biomedical subjects

Karen L Goa

Publications and source records attributed to Karen L Goa.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

PubMed2003

Desloratadine: an update of its efficacy in the management of allergic disorders.

UNLABELLED: Desloratadine (Clarinex, Neoclarityn, Aerius, Azomyr, Opulis, Allex), the principal metabolite of loratadine, is itself an orally active, nonsedating, peripheral histamine H(1)-receptor antagonist. It is indicated in the US and Europe for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) and chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU). It has a rapid onset of effect, efficacy throughout a 24-hour dosage interval, and sustained efficacy in these allergic conditions, as demonstrated in placebo-controlled trials of up to 6 weeks' duration in adult and adolescent patients. At present, there are no published direct comparisons of desloratadine and other H(1)-antihistamines; however, the principal, potential clinical advantages of desloratadine over late-generation H(1)-antihistamines are the drug's decongestant activity, which has been corroborated in several studies of patients with allergic rhinitis, and its anti-inflammatory effects. Indeed, the decongestant activity of desloratadine did not differ from that of pseudoephedrine in a trial in patients with SAR, and in patients with SAR and coexisting asthma, desloratadine reduced asthma symptoms and beta(2)-agonist use, and improved forced expiratory flow in 1 second. However, these issues warrant further study. Desloratadine is generally well tolerated. The overall incidence of adverse events in adults, adolescents and children was not significantly different to that with placebo, and similar proportions of desloratadine or placebo recipients reported events such as pharyngitis, dry mouth, myalgia, somnolence, dysmenorrhoea or fatigue. Desloratadine does not cause sedation or prolong the corrected QT (QTc) interval, can be administered without regard to concurrent intake of food and grapefruit juice, and appears to have negligible potential for drug interactions mediated by several metabolic systems. CONCLUSION: Although comparative studies with second-generation and other recently developed H(1)-antihistamines are needed to define the drug's clinical profile more clearly, desloratadine can be expected to claim a prominent place in the management of allergic disorders in general, and in the amelioration of specific symptoms of allergy (e.g. nasal congestion) in patients with such disorders.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

Measles, mumps, rubella vaccine (Priorix; GSK-MMR): a review of its use in the prevention of measles, mumps and rubella.

GSK-MMR (Priorix) is a trivalent live attenuated measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine which contains the Schwarz measles, the RIT 4385 mumps (derived from the Jeryl Lynn mumps strain) and the Wistar RA 27/3 rubella strains. GSK-MMR as a primary vaccination demonstrated high immunogenicity in clinical trials in >7500 infants aged 9-27 months, and was as immunogenic as Merck-MMR (MMR II). However, antimumps seroconversion rates and geometric mean titres (GMTs) were significantly higher in infants receiving GSK-MMR compared with Berna-MMR (Triviraten trade mark ) recipients. Coadministration of GSK-MMR with a varicella vaccine (Varilrix; GSK-MMR/V) did not significantly affect the immunogenicity of GSK-MMR. A persistent immune response to GSK-MMR has been demonstrated in follow-up data from several randomised trials. GMTs for measles, mumps and rubella antibodies remained high in GSK-MMR recipients 1-2 years post-vaccination and were similar to those in Merck-MMR recipients. The immunogenicity of GSK-MMR was high, and similar to that of Merck-MMR, when used as a second dose in children aged 4-6 or 11-12 years who had received a primary vaccination with Merck-MMR in their second year of life. Although there are no protective efficacy data concerning the GSK-MMR vaccine to date, the rubella Wistar RA 27/3 rubella and Schwarz measles strains have well established protective efficacy; the new RIT 4385 mumps strain is expected to afford similar protection from mumps to that achieved with mumps vaccines that contain the Jeryl Lynn mumps strain (e.g. Merck-MMR). GSK-MMR was well tolerated as a primary or secondary vaccination, and in most clinical studies comparing GSK-MMR with Merck-MMR as a primary vaccination in infants, GSK-MMR was associated with significantly fewer local adverse events (e.g. pain, swelling and redness). The incidence of local adverse events with GSK-MMR, GSK-MMR/V or Berna-MMR was similar. GSK-MMR and Merck-MMR were associated with similar rates of fever, rash and parotid gland swelling, but Berna-MMR was associated with a lower incidence of fever. In conclusion, GSK-MMR is a highly immunogenic MMR vaccine with good tolerability. In clinical trials, the immunogenicity of GSK-MMR was similar to that of Merck-MMR, and the mumps component was more effective at eliciting seroprotection than that of Berna-MMR. Furthermore, GSK-MMR causes fewer injection-site adverse events than Merck-MMR. As such, GSK-MMR is an attractive alternative for immunisation against measles, mumps and rubella.

Child↗

PubMed2003

Oxaliplatin: a review of its use in combination therapy for advanced metastatic colorectal cancer.

UNLABELLED: Oxaliplatin (Eloxatin) is the only platinum compound to show clinical activity in colorectal cancer. The efficacy of a combination of oxaliplatin with various schedules of fluorouracil (5-FU)/folinic acid (FA) as first- or second-line treatment for advanced metastatic colorectal cancer has been investigated in large phase III trials. FOLFOX4 (an oxaliplatin/5-FU/FA regimen) as first-line therapy (n = 795) was superior to irinotecan/5-FU/FA (IFL). Response rates were 45% vs 31%, and median progression-free survival duration was 8.7 vs 6.9 months. The survival advantage shown by FOLFOX4 over the irinotecan combination (median survival duration 19.5 vs 14.8 months) may be confounded by differences in post-study treatment but equivalent efficacy is supported by another phase III trial of oxaliplatin and irinotecan combinations. As first-line therapy, oxaliplatin added to various 5-FU/FA regimens more than doubled the response rates from 16-22.6% to 48.3-53% and the median duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer with oxaliplatin/5-FU/FA than 5-FU/FA alone (7.9-9 versus 5.3-6.2 months, respectively). In disease resistant to irinotecan-based therapies, the oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) regimen had superior efficacy to 5-FU/FA alone in a pivotal phase III trial (n = 816). Response rates and median durations of progression-free survival were 9.6% vs 0.7% and 5.6 vs 2.6 months, respectively. An oxaliplatin-induced cumulative peripheral sensory neuropathy (evident when total dose reaches approximate, equals 800 mg/m(2)) is dose limiting. The most frequently occurring grade 3 or 4 toxicities in oxaliplatin/5-FU/FA-recipients were neutropenia (up to 48%) and neurological toxicities (up to 18%). Gastrointestinal effects (diarrhoea [ approximate, equals 12%], nausea, vomiting, or mucositis/stomatitis [up to 6%]) are manageable. Withdrawals from oxaliplatin treatment were due to neuropathy (up to 10%), diarrhoea and/or vomiting (1%) or cutaneous toxicity (1%). CONCLUSION: As first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer, oxaliplatin with 5-FU/FA consistently improves response rates and progression-free survival compared with various regimens of 5-FU/FA alone. The significant survival advantage shown by oxaliplatin/5-FU/FA (FOLFOX4) compared with first-line therapy with irinotecan/5-FU/FA (IFL) is encouraging but may require further confirmation. Oxaliplatin/5-FU/FA produces a significantly higher response rate and longer progression-free survival than 5-FU/FA in patients failing irinotecan-based therapies, and as such is also a useful second-line treatment. Although cumulative neurotoxicity is dose limiting, oxaliplatin has a manageable tolerability profile. Oxaliplatin as first- or second-line therapy is a valuable addition to the limited, but expanding, armamentarium of cytotoxic agents useful in advanced metastatic colorectal cancer.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗

PubMed2003

Bemiparin: a review of its use in the prevention of venous thromboembolism and treatment of deep vein thrombosis.

UNLABELLED: Bemiparin (bemiparin sodium; Hibor, Ivor, Zibor, Badyket) is a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) with a lower mean molecular weight (3600 D) and a higher anti-Xa/IIa ratio (8:1) than other LMWHs. Bemiparin was effective as thromboprophylaxis in surgical patients in well controlled clinical trials. No cases of venous thromboembolism (VTE) were reported in low- to moderate-risk patients receiving prophylaxis with bemiparin 2500 anti-Xa IU/day for 7 days or unfractionated heparin (UFH) 5000 anti-Xa IU twice daily for 7 days. In high-risk patients, bemiparin 3500 anti-Xa IU/day for > or =8 days was more effective than UFH 5000 anti-Xa IU twice daily for > or =8 days in the prevention of VTE in patients undergoing total hip replacement. Postoperative bemiparin 3500 anti-Xa IU/day for 10 days was as effective as enoxaparin 4000 anti-Xa IU/day for 10 days commenced 12 hours before surgery in high-risk patients undergoing total knee replacement. As a short-term treatment for acute established deep vein thrombosis (DVT), bemiparin 5000-10 000 anti-Xa IU/day (dependent on bodyweight) for 7 or 10 days was more effective than intravenous UFH (5000 anti-Xa IU bolus followed by 30,000 or 40,000 anti-Xa IU/day for 7 days) in reducing thrombus size from baseline. Bemiparin 3500 anti-Xa IU/day was also as effective as oral warfarin (10 mg/day for the first 3 days, then adjusted to achieve an international normalised ratio between 2 and 3) for the long-term (12 weeks) treatment of DVT, although data are limited. Subcutaneous bemiparin was generally well tolerated. The most commonly reported adverse events in clinical trials were postoperative bleeding complications (similar incidence to that with UFH or enoxaparin in high-risk patients, lower incidence in low- to moderate-risk patients). CONCLUSIONS: Bemiparin is a new LMWH which has shown efficacy in a small number of well controlled trials in the prevention of postoperative VTE in low- to moderate- and high-risk patients and in the treatment of established DVT. It can be initiated pre- or post-operatively, whereas recommendations for other LMWHs in Europe primarily involve preoperative initiation. Additional comparative studies would be beneficial in determining the overall place of bemiparin, particularly with respect to the relative incidence of bleeding complications. In the meantime, available data suggest that bemiparin is an effective and useful addition to the available range of LMWHs for the prevention of VTE and treatment of DVT.

Area Under Curve↗

PubMed2003

Miglustat.

Miglustat is an orally administered ceramide glucosyltransferase inhibitor which prevents the lysosomal accumulation of glucocerebroside that occurs in patients with Gaucher's disease. In noncomparative trials in patients with type 1 Gaucher's disease, miglustat (50 or 100mg three times daily) for 6-12 months significantly reduced baseline liver and spleen volumes. At both 6 and 12 months, the reductions in organ volumes were greater with the higher dosage. Miglustat 50 or 100mg three times daily for 6-12 months had no significant effect on haemoglobin concentrations. Baseline platelet counts were not significantly improved by either dosage at 6 months, although the higher dosage significantly increased platelet counts at 12 months. In an open extension phase, patients continued to show further reductions in organ volume as well as significant improvements in haematological parameters at 24 and 36 months. black triangle In a 6-month randomised study in patients with type 1 Gaucher's disease who had previously received long-term enzyme replacement therapy (ERT), liver volume reduction was greater with miglustat plus ERT than with ERT alone. Diarrhoea and weight loss were the most frequent adverse events associated with miglustat therapy. Fine tremor has been reported in approximately 30% of miglustat-treated patients.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

PubMed2003

Lercanidipine : a review of its efficacy in the management of hypertension.

UNLABELLED: Lercanidipine (Zanidip) is a vasoselective dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist that causes systemic vasodilation by blocking the influx of calcium ions through L-type calcium channels in cell membranes. It is a highly lipophilic drug that exhibits a slower onset and longer duration of action than other calcium channel antagonists. Furthermore, lercanidipine may have antiatherogenic activity unrelated to its antihypertensive effect. In two large, nonblind, noncomparative studies involving approximately 16 000 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension, systolic blood pressure (BP) [SBP] and diastolic BP (DBP) were significantly reduced after 12 weeks' treatment with lercanidipine 10-20 mg/day. Furthermore, in the largest study, 64% of patients were responders (DBP <90 mm Hg) after 12 weeks of treatment and an additional 32% had their BP normalised (BP <140/90 mm Hg). In comparative trials, lercanidipine 10-20 mg/day was as effective as nifedipine slow release (SR) 20-40 mg twice daily, amlodipine 10 mg/day, felodipine 10-20 mg/day, nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) 30-60 mg once daily or verapamil SR 240 mg/day at reducing SBP and DBP in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension after 2-16 weeks of therapy. In addition, 4 weeks of lercanidipine therapy (10 mg/day) was as effective as captopril 25mg twice daily, atenolol 50 mg/day or hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg/day. Lercanidipine 5-30 mg/day effectively decreased BP in elderly patients (aged >60 years) with mild-to-moderate hypertension or isolated systolic hypertension to the same extent as amlodipine 5-10 mg/day, nifedipine GITS 30-60 mg/day or lacidipine 2-4 mg/day after 24-26 weeks of therapy. In addition, a limited number of studies suggest that lercanidipine may have antihypertensive efficacy in patients with severe or resistant hypertension, in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and in postmenopausal women with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. Lercanidipine is well tolerated, with most treatment-emergent events related to vasodilation. Common adverse events included headache, flushing and peripheral oedema. Importantly, the incidence of vasodilatory oedema was significantly lower in patients receiving lercanidipine than in those receiving some other calcium channel antagonists. CONCLUSION: Once-daily lercanidipine is an effective and well tolerated antihypertensive agent in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.

Calcium Channel Blockers↗

PubMed2003

Levofloxacin: a review of its use in the treatment of bacterial infections in the United States.

UNLABELLED: Levofloxacin (Levaquin) is a fluoroquinolone antibacterial agent with a broad spectrum of activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and atypical respiratory pathogens. It is active against both penicillin-susceptible and penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae. The prevalence of S. pneumoniae resistance to levofloxacin is <1% overall in the US.A number of randomised comparative trials in the US have demonstrated the efficacy of levofloxacin in the treatment of infections of the respiratory tract, genitourinary tract, skin and skin structures. Sequential intravenous to oral levofloxacin 750mg once daily for 7-14 days was as effective in the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia as intravenous imipenem/cilastatin 500-1000mg every 6-8 hours followed by oral ciprofloxacin 750mg twice daily in one study. In patients with mild to severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), intravenous and/or oral levofloxacin 500mg once daily for 7-14 days achieved clinical and bacteriological response rates similar to those with comparator agents, including amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, clarithromycin, azithromycin, ceftriaxone and/or cefuroxime axetil and gatifloxacin. A recent study indicates that intravenous or oral levofloxacin 750mg once daily for 5 days is as effective as 500mg once daily for 10 days, in the treatment of mild to severe CAP. Exacerbations of chronic bronchitis and acute maxillary sinusitis respond well to treatment with oral levofloxacin 500mg once daily for 7 and 10-14 days, respectively. Oral levofloxacin was as effective as ofloxacin in uncomplicated urinary tract infections and ciprofloxacin or lomefloxacin in complicated urinary tract infections. In men with chronic bacterial prostatitis treated for 28 days, oral levofloxacin 500mg once daily achieved similar clinical and bacteriological response rates to oral ciprofloxacin 500mg twice daily. Uncomplicated skin infections responded well to oral levofloxacin 500mg once daily for 7-10 days, while in complicated skin infections intravenous and/or oral levofloxacin 750mg for 7-14 days was at least as effective as intravenous ticarcillin/clavulanic acid (+/- switch to oral amoxicillin/clavulanic acid) administered for the same duration. Levofloxacin is generally well tolerated, with the most frequently reported adverse events being nausea and diarrhoea; in comparison with some other quinolones it has a low photosensitising potential and clinically significant cardiac and hepatic adverse events are rare. CONCLUSION: Levofloxacin is a broad-spectrum antibacterial agent with activity against a range of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and atypical organisms. It provides clinical and bacteriological efficacy in a range of infections, including those caused by both penicillin-susceptible and -resistant strains of S. pneumoniae. Levofloxacin is well tolerated, and is associated with few of the phototoxic, cardiac or hepatic adverse events seen with some other quinolones. It also has a pharmacokinetic profile that is compatible with once-daily administration and allows for sequential intravenous to oral therapy. The recent approvals in the US for use in the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia and chronic bacterial prostatitis, and the introduction of a short-course, high-dose regimen for use in CAP, further extend the role of levofloxacin in treating bacterial infections.

Anti-Infective Agents↗

PubMed2003

Escitalopram : a review of its use in the management of major depressive and anxiety disorders.

UNLABELLED: Escitalopram is the therapeutically active S-enantiomer of RS-citalopram, a commonly prescribed SSRI. The R-enantiomer is essentially pharmacologically inactive. Escitalopram 10 or 20 mg/day produced significantly greater improvements in standard measurements of antidepressant effect (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS], Clinical Global Impressions Improvement and Severity scales [CGI-I and CGI-S] and Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HAM-D]) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) than placebo in several 8-week, placebo-controlled, randomised, double-blind, multicentre studies. Symptom improvement was rapid, with some parameters improving within 1-2 weeks of starting escitalopram treatment. In addition, escitalopram showed earlier and clearer separation from placebo than RS-citalopram, at one-quarter to half the dosage, in 8-week, placebo-controlled trials; had significantly better efficacy than RS-citalopram in a subgroup of patients with moderate MDD in a 24-week trial; and produced sustained response and remission significantly faster than venlafaxine extended release in patients with MDD. Escitalopram reduced relapse rate compared with placebo and increased the percentage of patients in remission in long-term trials (up to 52 weeks). Consistently significant improvements for all efficacy parameters were also observed in patients with generalised anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder and panic disorder treated with escitalopram for 8-12 weeks in individual, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind investigations. The good tolerability profile of escitalopram is predictable and similar to that of RS-citalopram. Such adverse events as nausea, ejaculatory problems, diarrhoea and insomnia are expected but, with the exception of ejaculatory problems and nausea, which is mild and transient, these were generally no more frequent than with placebo in fully published clinical trials. No adverse events not previously seen in acute trials were reported with long-term use. CONCLUSIONS: Escitalopram, the S-enantiomer of RS-citalopram, is a highly selective inhibitor for the serotonin transporter, ameliorates depressive symptoms in patients with MDD at half the RS-citalopram dosage, has a rapid onset of symptom improvement and has a predictable tolerability profile of generally mild adverse events. Like RS-citalopram, escitalopram is expected to have a low propensity for drug interactions, a potential benefit in the management of patients with comorbidities. In combination, these properties place escitalopram, like other SSRIs, as first-line therapy in patients with MDD. Escitalopram is indicated for use in patients with panic disorder in Europe and, should further evidence confirm early findings that escitalopram reduces anxiety, the drug may well find an additional role in the management of anxiety disorders.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

Topiramate: as monotherapy in newly diagnosed epilepsy.

Topiramate is an antiepileptic drug that has a broad spectrum of antiseizure effects, which appear to be the result of several neurostabilising pharmacological mechanisms. These include blockade of ion channels, potentiation of GABA neuroinhibition and glutamate receptor antagonism at non-NMDA receptors, as well as mild inhibition of carbonic anhydrase. Topiramate monotherapy dose dependently reduced the number of patients who met seizure related exit criteria in children (aged > or =6 years) and adults with epilepsy. This effect was also observed in patients who had previously experienced partial onset seizures and for those who had experienced generalised tonic clonic seizures. Six-month and 1-year seizure-free rates were dose-dependently reduced. In epilepsy, topiramate monotherapy 100 or 200 mg/day was as effective as carbamazepine 600 mg/day or valproate 1250 mg/day as measured by time to study exit for any reason, time to first seizure and percentage of patients seizure-free in the final 6 months of treatment (mean treatment duration 244 days). Adverse events associated with topiramate monotherapy that were dosage related included paraesthesia, weight loss and diarrhoea. Renal calculi were also reported in both fully published trials.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

Spotlight on insulin aspart in type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus.

UNLABELLED: Insulin aspart (NovoLog, NovoRapid), a rapid-acting human insulin analog, provides more rapid absorption than regular human insulin after subcutaneous administration. In most randomized, nonblind clinical trials in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, insulin aspart administered immediately before meals resulted in significantly lower mean glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels than regular human insulin (usually administered 30 minutes before a meal). Insulin aspart also significantly improved postprandial glycemic control compared with regular human insulin. The efficacy of insulin aspart was similar to that of insulin lispro when administered to patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus via continuous subcutaneous infusion in a randomized, nonblind trial. Preliminary data from randomized, nonblind trials suggest insulin aspart had a trend towards lower HbA1c levels compared with regular human insulin in patients with type 2,diabetes mellitus. Biphasic insulin aspart (30% soluble [rapid-acting] and 70% protamine-bound insulin aspart [BIAsp30]) [NovoLog Mix 70/30, NovoMix 30(2)] generally provided significantly better postprandial glucose control than a similar mixture of biphasic regular human insulin (BHI30) in a randomized, nonblind trial in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus. However, the long-term efficacy of BIAsp30 was similar to that of BHI30 after 2 years in a randomized, nonblind trial in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus reported greater treatment satisfaction with insulin aspart or BIAsp30 than with regular human insulin or BHI30. The overall incidence of hypoglycemia with insulin aspart was lower than, or similar to, that of regular human insulin. Moreover, insulin aspart tended to be associated with a lower occurrence of nocturnal hypoglycemia and severe hypoglycemic events than regular human insulin. CONCLUSION: The standard preparation of insulin aspart has the potential to better mimic the physiological response to meals than regular human insulin. Insulin aspart when combined with a suitable basal insulin improved overall glycemic control and led to a similar or lower number of hypoglycemic episodes compared with a similar regular human insulin regimen. Insulin aspart was generally as effective and well tolerated as insulin lispro when administered by continuous subcutaneous infusion in a single comparative trial. The efficacy of biphasic insulin aspart has been documented in a small number of trials. Both insulin aspart and biphasic insulin aspart provide for flexible and convenient administration. Insulin aspart is now well established as an effective and convenient means of providing glycemic control which offers clinical and practical advantages over regular human insulin.

Biphasic Insulins↗

PubMed2003

Transdermal ethinylestradiol/norelgestromin: a review of its use in hormonal contraception.

UNLABELLED: Ethinylestradiol 20 microg/day plus norelgestromin 150 microg/day have been formulated into a transdermal patch for hormonal contraception. The predominant mechanism of action for transdermal ethinylestradiol/norelgestromin (Ortho Evra, Evra) is inhibition of ovulation by suppression of gonadotropins. It suppresses follicular development, induces changes to the endometrium that reduce the probability of implantation, and increases the viscosity of cervical mucus, which may prevent sperm penetration into the uterus. Two large randomized, nonblind efficacy studies demonstrated that transdermal ethinylestradiol/norelgestromin was as efficacious in preventing pregnancy as oral triphasic ethinylestradiol/levonorgestrel or oral ethinylestradiol/desogestrel. A large, noncomparative study also showed transdermal ethinylestradiol/norelgestromin to have good contraceptive efficacy. Moreover, in the two comparative trials, women using transdermal ethinylestradiol/norelgestromin had higher rates of perfect compliance than women using oral contraception. Age did not affect the rate of perfect compliance in women using the transdermal ethinylestradiol/norelgestromin patch, whereas the rate of compliance reduced with younger age in oral contraceptive users. Pooled results from three efficacy studies found that 1.8% of patches were replaced as a result of complete detachment and 2.9% because of partial detachment. Physical exercise, water immersion, and living in a humid climate did not affect patch adhesion. Transdermal ethinylestradiol/norelgestromin was generally well tolerated in clinical trials. The most common menstrual disturbances were breakthrough bleeding/spotting and dysmenorrhea. The incidence of discontinuation of treatment because of an adverse event was < or = 3.2%, with the most common reason being application-site reactions. CONCLUSIONS: Transdermal ethinylestradiol/norelgestromin offers a well tolerated, effective, reversible, and easy-to-use method of hormonal contraception with an increased likelihood of compliance relative to oral contraceptives.

Administration, Cutaneous↗

PubMed2003

Terbinafine: a review of its use in onychomycosis in adults.

UNLABELLED: Terbinafine, an orally and topically active antimycotic agent, inhibits the biosynthesis of the principal sterol in fungi, ergosterol, at the level of squalene epoxidase. Squalene epoxidase inhibition results in ergosterol-depleted fungal cell membranes (fungistatic effect) and the toxic accumulation of intracellular squalene (fungicidal effect). Terbinafine has demonstrated excellent fungicidal activity against the dermatophytes and variable activity against yeasts and non-dermatophyte molds in vitro. Following oral administration, terbinafine is rapidly absorbed and widely distributed to body tissues including the poorly perfused nail matrix. Nail terbinafine concentrations are detected within 1 week after starting therapy and persist for at least 30 weeks after the completion of treatment. Randomized, double-blind trials showed oral terbinafine 250 mg/day for 12 or 16 weeks was more efficacious than itraconazole, fluconazole and griseofulvin in dermatophyte onychomycosis of the toenails. In particular, at 72 weeks' follow-up, the multicenter, multinational, L.I.ON. (Lamisil vs Itraconazole in ONychomycosis) study found that mycologic cure rates (76 vs 38% of patients after 12 weeks' treatment; 81 vs 49% of recipients after 16 weeks' therapy) and complete cure rates were approximately twice as high after terbinafine treatment than after itraconazole (3 or 4 cycles of 400 mg/day for 1 week repeated every 4 weeks) in patients with toenail mycosis. Furthermore, the L.I.ON. Icelandic Extension study demonstrated that terbinafine was more clinically effective than intermittent itraconazole to a statistically significant extent at 5-year follow-up. Terbinafine produced a superior complete cure rate (35 vs 14%), mycologic cure rate (46 vs 13%) and clinical cure rate (42 vs 18%) to that of itraconazole. The mycologic and clinical relapse rates were 23% and 21% in the terbinafine group, respectively, compared with 53% and 48% in the itraconazole group. In comparative clinical trials, oral terbinafine had a better tolerability profile than griseofulvin and a comparable profile to that of itraconazole or fluconazole. Post marketing surveillance confirmed terbinafine's good tolerability profile. Adverse events were experienced by 10.5% of terbinafine recipients, with gastrointestinal complaints being the most common. Unlike the azoles, terbinafine has a low potential for drug-drug interactions. Most pharmacoeconomic evaluations have shown that the greater clinical effectiveness of oral terbinafine in dermatophyte onychomycosis translates into a cost-effectiveness ratio superior to that of itraconazole, fluconazole and griseofulvin. CONCLUSION: Oral terbinafine has demonstrated greater effectiveness than itraconazole, fluconazole and griseofulvin in randomized trials involving patients with onychomycosis caused by dermatophytes. The drug is generally well tolerated and has a low potential for drug interactions. Therefore, terbinafine is the treatment of choice for dermatophyte onychomycosis.

Antifungal Agents↗

PubMed2003

Linezolid: in infants and children with severe Gram-positive infections.

Linezolid is an oxazolidinone antibacterial agent that has inhibitory activity against a broad range of Gram-positive bacteria, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, and penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae. The systemic clearance and, therefore, the area under the plasma concentration-time curve and elimination half-life of linezolid change with increasing age in pediatric patients. With the exception of pre-term neonates aged <1 week, systemic clearance is more rapid in pediatric patients aged 0-11 years than in adolescents. The pharmacokinetic profile of linezolid is similar in adolescents and adults. Linezolid was as effective as vancomycin in the treatment of pediatric patients with Gram-positive infections (clinical cure rate 89.3% vs 84.5%), and as effective as cefadroxil in the treatment of children and adolescents with Gram-positive uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections (91.0% vs 90.0%) in the clinically evaluable population of two randomized, comparator-controlled trials. The clinical cure rate with linezolid was 92.4% in a noncomparative trial in hospitalized pediatric patients with community-acquired pneumonia. All patients with proven pneumococcal pneumonia were considered cured. Linezolid is generally well tolerated. The most common drug-related adverse events in the comparator-controlled trials were diarrhea, nausea, and headache; most events were mild to moderate in severity.

Acetamides↗

PubMed2003

Ezetimibe.

Ezetimibe, a synthetic 2-azetidinone, is the first of a new class of compounds that selectively inhibits the absorption of cholesterol and related plant sterols in the intestine. The drug, and its glucuronyl metabolite, are thought to inhibit a putative cholesterol transporter of enterocytes, located within the brush-border membrane of the small intestine. In large, randomized, placebo-controlled, 12-week trials, ezetimibe reduced levels of low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) by approximately 18%; triglyceride levels were reduced by approximately 6% in one trial but not another. Ezetimibe produced a modest increase in levels of high density lipoprotein-cholesterol. Moreover, reductions in LDL-C and triglyceride levels were greater in patients treated with ezetimibe coadministered with a statin (lovastatin, pravastatin, atorvastatin or simvastatin), than with either of those agents given alone. The coadministration of the lowest statin dose and ezetimibe produced similar LDL-C reductions to the administration of the highest statin dose alone. Ezetimibe also provided beneficial effects on plasma lipid levels when administered to patients with hypercholesterolemia already receiving a statin. Ezetimibe plus a statin reduced LDL-C levels more than the maximum statin dose alone in a trial in patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia and was effective in a placebo-controlled trial in patients with homozygous sitosterolemia. The drug was well tolerated in clinical studies conducted to date. In large, randomized, double-blind trials, ezetimibe had a similar tolerability profile to that of placebo. Coadministration of ezetimibe and a statin did not increase the incidence of adverse events related to statin monotherapy.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

Cilostazol: a review of its use in intermittent claudication.

UNLABELLED: Cilostazol (Pletal) is a selective inhibitor of phosphodiesterase-III with antiplatelet, antithrombotic and vasodilating properties. It also exhibits antiproliferative effects on smooth muscle cells and has beneficial effects on high density lipoprotein-cholesterol and triglyceride levels.Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 12- to 24-week trials in >2000 patients with moderate to severe intermittent claudication demonstrated that cilostazol generally significantly increased walking distances and improved quality of life compared with placebo. Additionally, a large comparative 24-week trial showed that cilostazol 100 mg twice daily was significantly more effective than pentoxifylline 400mg three times daily (pentoxifylline was not significantly different from placebo). Cilostazol was generally well tolerated. Adverse events reported significantly more often with cilostazol than with placebo included headache, diarrhea, abnormal stools, infection, rhinitis and peripheral edema and in comparison with pentoxifylline were headache, diarrhea, abnormal stools and palpitations. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate in intensity, transient or resolved after symptomatic treatment and rarely required treatment withdrawal. Significant drug interactions are observed when cilostazol is coadministered with other agents that inhibit cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 (e.g. erythromycin or diltiazem) or CYP2C19 (e.g. omeprazole). As a result, in Europe cilostazol is contraindicated in patients receiving CYP3A4 or CYP2C19 inhibitors and in the US it is recommended that dosage reduction for cilostazol be considered during coadministration of cilostazol and CYP3A4 or CYP2C19 inhibitors. Conversely, cilostazol itself does not appear to inhibit CYP3A4. Coadministration of cilostazol with aspirin or warfarin did not result in any clinically significant changes to coagulation parameters, bleeding time or platelet aggregation. CONCLUSION: In six of eight well designed clinical trials, cilostazol was significantly more effective than placebo in increasing walking distances and improving the quality of life of patients with moderate to severe intermittent claudication. In addition, limited comparative data have shown that cilostazol has superior efficacy compared with pentoxifylline. Cilostazol is also generally well tolerated. Additional comparative trials are required to confirm these results, to determine the place of cilostazol in relation to other agents or exercise therapy and risk factor reduction alone, and to establish the effects of long-term treatment with cilostazol in patients with intermittent claudication. Cilostazol is contraindicated in several subpopulations of patients, particularly those with congestive heart failure and severe hepatic or renal impairment. Nonetheless, current data support the choice of cilostazol as a promising therapy amongst the limited options available for patients with intermittent claudication.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

The sirolimus-eluting stent: a review of its use in the treatment of coronary artery disease.

UNLABELLED: The sirolimus-eluting stent (CYPHER( trade mark )) is a metal stent coated with 140 micro g/cm(2) of sirolimus blended with synthetic polymers. After stent implantation, sirolimus is slowly released causing localized cytostatic inhibition of proliferation of vascular smooth muscle cells in the peri-stent arterial wall over a period of about 1 month. Only minimal amounts of sirolimus enter the bloodstream and these appear to be insufficient to be of clinical relevance. In clinical trials that evaluated single de novo lesions and in-stent restenosis in patients with coronary artery disease, the sirolimus-eluting stent was associated with minimal neointimal hyperplasia. In four randomized trials in de novo lesions, sirolimus eluting stents produced a significantly lower incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) than that observed in patients with uncoated stents, during periods of up to 2 years (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). The lower incidence of MACE was mostly due to a reduced requirement for repeat target vessel revascularization. At angiographic follow-up at periods of up to 8 months, late luminal loss was significantly smaller in the sirolimus-eluting stent groups than in the uncoated-stent groups (p < 0.001 in all studies). The sirolimus-eluting stent was well tolerated in clinical trials of up to 3 years' follow-up. Because minimal blood levels of sirolimus are achieved, systemic adverse effects appear to be avoided. To date, there has been no evidence of any potential adverse effects resulting from the polymer coating or local drug toxicity. As yet, there is no evidence of an increased risk of subacute or late thrombosis, or aneurysm formation with the sirolimus-eluting stent compared with the uncoated stent. Long-term follow-up is needed to fully assess these theoretical concerns. Cost-effectiveness analyses over 12 months demonstrated a cost advantage for the sirolimus-eluting stent compared with an uncoated stent because of a reduced requirement for repeat target vessel revascularizations. CONCLUSION: Initial clinical trials with the sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with de novo coronary lesions have shown a significantly reduced incidence of MACE and of restenosis compared with a standard stent. Efficacy appears to be maintained throughout follow-up periods of up to 2 years in randomized trials, and to date, systemic or local adverse effects have been avoided. If efficacy and tolerability are consistently demonstrated over the long term, the sirolimus-eluting stent will be a major advance in the control of in-stent restenosis.

Coronary Artery Disease↗

PubMed2003

Spotlight on abciximab in patients with ischemic heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization.

UNLABELLED: Abciximab (Reopro) is an antibody fragment that dose-dependently inhibits platelet aggregation and leucocyte adhesion by binding to the glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa, vitronectin and Mac-1 receptors. Abciximab (0.25 mg/kg bolus plus infusion of 0.125 micro g/kg/min for 12 hours) showed greater efficacy than tirofiban in reducing the 30-day composite endpoint of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) or urgent target-vessel revascularization in the randomized, double-blind TARGET study in patients scheduled for stent placement. In addition, the beneficial effects of treatment with abciximab previously observed in the randomized, multicenter, placebo-controlled EPILOG and EPISTENT studies have been maintained to 1 year, with a significantly reduced incidence of ischemic complications relative to placebo consistently observed across a range of subgroups including age, sex, bodyweight and indication for revascularization. The incidence of the composite endpoint was reduced in patients presenting with acute MI of <48 hours' duration in comparison with either fibrinolytic therapy or stenting alone in the randomized STOPAMI and ADMIRAL trials, primarily because of a reduced requirement for urgent repeat revascularization and reduced incidence of mortality. In the randomized, nonblind, multicenter CADILLAC trial in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI), stenting alone was superior to percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and stenting alone was not inferior to PTCA plus abciximab. Recent large randomized, multicenter studies (ASSENT-3 and GUSTO-V) have shown higher efficacy (on various ischemic endpoints) of abciximab in combination with either a reduced dose of tenecteplase or reteplase compared with the fibrinolytic drug alone. TIMI grade 3 flow rates at 60 and 90 minutes in the TIMI-14 and SPEED trials were higher in patients who received abciximab in combination with either alteplase or reteplase than abciximab alone and were similar to that seen with the full-dose fibrinolytic alone. In the randomized, multicenter GUSTO IV-ACS study, no significant differences in any of the ischemic endpoints at either 7 or 30 days in patients with acute coronary syndromes who were not scheduled to undergo early revascularization (within 12 hours of end of infusion) were apparent between those who received abciximab (bolus and either 24- or 48-hour infusion) and those who received placebo in addition to aspirin and heparin. The most common adverse events associated with the use of abciximab are bleeding complications and thrombocytopenia, although the risk of major bleeding can be limited through adhering to current administration protocols. Treatment costs are generally higher in both stent plus abciximab and angioplasty plus abciximab groups than stent plus placebo, primarily because of the acquisition cost of abciximab. Abciximab appeared most cost beneficial in high-risk patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary revascularization; among lower risk patients, abciximab therapy has been associated with higher total in-hospital and 6-month medical costs than eptifibatide. CONCLUSION: The GP IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist abciximab, when used with aspirin and heparin, has demonstrated efficacy in reducing the short- and long-term risk of ischemic complications in patients with ischemic heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, when used with aspirin and heparin. High-risk patients (including those with diabetes mellitus) derive particular benefits from abciximab treatment. Abciximab remains an important therapeutic option for the prevention of complications in patients with ischaemic heart disease.

Abciximab↗

PubMed2002

Flunisolide HFA.

Flunisolide is a synthetic corticosteroid approved for the treatment of persistent asthma and delivered by means of a metered-dose inhaler (MDI). A new formulation of flunisolide, using hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) as a propellant, has been developed to comply with the mandated worldwide phase-out of ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) propellants. Aerosol particle size in the new flunisolide HFA solution is smaller than the flunisolide CFC suspension (1.2 vs 3.8 microm mass median aerodynamic diameter). Aerosol particle size is a key element in determining lung deposition and the regional distribution of inhaled medication within the lung. In addition, the flunisolide HFA MDI has been redesigned to include a built-in spacer. These features have improved distal lung deposition. Flunisolide HFA, at one-third the dosage (170 and 340 microg twice daily), had similar efficacy to flunisolide CFC (500 and 1000 microg twice daily) and significantly greater efficacy than placebo in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week study in patients with mild to moderate asthma. Flunisolide HFA was well tolerated in all trials. A long-term study found no suppression of adrenal function and minimal systemic effects were observed both in adults and children.

Aerosol Propellants↗