Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Once-daily Dosing (once-daily + dosing)
Terms modified by Once-daily Dosing Selected AbstractsReview article: new drug formulations, chemical entities and therapeutic approaches for the management of ulcerative colitisALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, Issue 7 2008S. C. NG Summary Background, Treatment options for ulcerative colitis (UC) are expanding with the development of novel drug formulations and dosing regimens and new chemical entities. Although the goals of medical therapy for UC remain unchanged, that is to induce and to maintain remission, focus has also centred on improving patient compliance, modifying the natural course of disease and healing the mucosa. Aim, To examine novel formulations, new chemical entities and novel therapeutic approaches to the management of UC. Methods, Searches for all studies related to UC treatment in Medline and abstracts from major national and international meetings published in the last 10 years. Results, 5-Aminosalicylic acids (5-ASA) remain the standard first-line treatment for patients with mild to moderately active UC. New formulations with altered delivery, and new dosing regimens have demonstrated possible improvements in efficacy compared with historically available preparations and dosing patterns. Once-daily dosing, micropellet formulations, and high-dose tablets offer enhanced efficacy and improved compliance. 5-ASA is now recognized as a ligand for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-, (PPAR-,) and it has a role as a chemo-preventive agent in long-standing UC. New colonic release corticosteroid formulations help to limit systemic toxicity; turmeric, tacrolimus and infliximab have shown promising results. New anti-inflammatory targeted therapies include an anti-CD3 antibody, selective integrin blockers, anti-IL-2 antibody and PPAR-, agonists. Conclusion, The evolution of novel oral 5-ASA formulations and dosage regimens, and recent development of new molecules have expanded the therapeutic armamentarium of UC. [source] Migraine Prevention: What Patients Want From Medication and Their Physicians (A Headache Specialty Clinic Perspective)HEADACHE, Issue 5 2006Todd D. Rozen MD Objective.,To document the results of a migraine patients survey, from a headache specialty clinic, in which patients were asked to rank, in order of importance, certain characteristics of migraine preventive treatment. Methods.,A 10-question survey was completed by 150 patients (114 females and 36 males) with a history of migraine who presented to the Michigan Head Pain & Neurological Institute. The patients were asked to rank, in order of importance, characteristics of migraine preventive treatment. Each characteristic was rated individually on a 1 to 10 scale (1 being of little importance and 10 being extremely important). The mean rating of each characteristic was then calculated and the results analyzed. Results/Discussion.,From this migraine preventive treatment survey, the most important thing to migraineurs, from a headache specialty clinic population, is that the prescribing physician involves them in the decision making of choosing a preventive agent. The physician taking time to explain the possible medication side effects is the second most highly ranked characteristic. Migraine preventives with published efficacy in the medical literature are also deemed very important. Migraineurs do not mind using more than 1 preventive agent at one time if greater efficacy can be achieved. Agents that may affect weight and /or cause sedation may be important factors as to why patients (especially females) may not want to take a preventive medication. Natural therapies and once-daily dosing are ranked lower overall but still are important characteristics of preventive treatment. Some gender differences are noted in the ranking of migraine preventive characteristics. [source] Once-daily nevirapine dosing: a pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety reviewHIV MEDICINE, Issue 1 2007CL Cooper In the context of attempts to simplify treatment regimens and enhance adherence, there is great interest in once-daily dosing regimens for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. Nevirapine has a long half-life and achieves high steady-state plasma concentrations relative to the concentration required to inhibit 50% viral replication in vitro (IC50) in patients. For this reason, it has been considered as a once-daily antiretroviral. Pharmacokinetic and efficacy data support the use of this dosing approach, but excess rash and lingering concerns over liver toxicity preclude use of once-daily dosed nevirapine at this time. Tolerance to high nevirapine concentrations may develop when dose escalation is used during initiation of therapy. It is theoretically possible that the benefits of once-daily dosing may be achieved without excess toxicity by switching to once-daily nevirapine following several months of twice-daily administration. This dosing strategy is currently under evaluation. [source] Safety and tolerability of once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate in acute schizophrenia: pooled data from randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studiesHUMAN PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY: CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL, Issue 2 2010Didier Meulien Abstract Introduction Extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) is a new formulation that allows once-daily dosing and a titration regimen that is simpler than that of immediate release quetiapine (quetiapine IR) and may potentially increase patients' adherence to their prescribed medication. Methods The tolerability of quetiapine XR was examined in an analysis of pooled data from three Phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised studies with quetiapine IR as a reference treatment. Results The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar for quetiapine XR (69.5%) and quetiapine IR (72.5%). Most AEs were mild to moderate in severity and in line with those observed with quetiapine IR. The more rapid dose titration of quetiapine XR did not produce any new safety concerns and was as well tolerated as the regimen for quetiapine IR. Conclusions The results of this pooled analysis show that quetiapine XR administered once daily is generally as well tolerated as quetiapine IR given twice daily. These data, together with the simpler dose-titration of quetiapine XR that allowed therapeutically effective doses to be reached by Day 2, suggest that this formulation potentially may improve adherence in patients with schizophrenia. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] National survey of the prevalence and conditions of selection of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase K70E mutation,JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY, Issue 5 2008C. Delaugerre Abstract Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) has become an important component of HIV combination therapy because of its potency and once-daily dosing. Key mutation associated with resistance to TDF is a K65R in the reverse transcriptase (RT) gene. According to occurrence of K70E mutation after failure to TDF regimen, this mutation was recently reported as a mutation associated with TDF resistance in most resistance genotypic algorithms. The aim of this study was to analyze, retrospectively, the prevalence and conditions of selection of HIV-1 RT K70E mutation from a national clinical survey. Absence of selection of K70E in 850 HIV-1-infected naive patients suggests its role in NRTI drug resistance. Prevalence of K70E RT was low (99/41601, 0.24%) in patients treated between 1999 and 2005. Conversely with K65R mutation, thymidine analog mutations (TAMs) can be concomitantly observed with K70E mutation but its frequency decreased as the number of TAM increases. Concomitant association of K65R and K70E was possible but infrequent (11%). At the time of K70E selection, 60% of patients had received or received TDF-containing regimen and one-third received exclusive NRTI regimen. In conclusion, the K70E mutation could be an alternative pathway of TDF resistance, but as the K65R mutation, other NRTI as ABC, ddI, and 3TC could be also associated with the K70E selection. J. Med. Virol. 80:762,765, 2008. © 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] Clinical trial: intragastric acid control in patients who have Barrett's oesophagus,comparison of once- and twice-daily regimens of esomeprazole and lansoprazoleALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, Issue 2 2009S. J. SPECHLER Summary Background, Gastric acid control is important for treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease associated with Barrett's oesophagus. Substantial indirect evidence suggests that gastric acid control may have a chemopreventive role in Barrett's oesophagus. Aim, To compare the pharmacodynamic efficacy of esomeprazole and lansoprazole at two dosages for intragastric pH control with Barrett's oesophagus. Methods, Patients with Barrett's oesophagus received open-label consecutive treatment (a 15-day period of once-daily dosing followed by a 10-day period of twice-daily dosing) with esomeprazole (40-mg capsules) and lansoprazole (30-mg capsules) in random order with no washouts. Twenty-four-hour intragastric pH was recorded on the last day of each dosing period. The primary end point was the percentage of time with intragastric pH > 4.0. Results, In the per-protocol once- (n = 46) and twice-daily (n = 41) analyses, the percentage of time with intragastric pH > 4.0 was significantly (P < 0.0001) longer after once- (67.1%) or twice-daily (81.2%) esomeprazole than after once- (50.8%) or twice-daily (64.3%) lansoprazole. The proportion of patients with intragastric pH > 4.0 for >12 h was significantly higher for esomeprazole than lansoprazole with once- (P = 0.004) and twice-daily (P = 0.016) dosing. Conclusion, Esomeprazole 40 mg is significantly more effective than lansoprazole 30 mg in controlling intragastric pH with Barrett's oesophagus. [source] Review article: dual delayed release formulation of dexlansoprazole MR, a novel approach to overcome the limitations of conventional single release proton pump inhibitor therapyALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, Issue 9 2009D. C. METZ Summary Background, Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) provide the most effective pharmacotherapy for treating acid-related disorders. However, PPIs do not completely control acid over 24 h with once-daily dosing. Aims, To discuss limitations inherent in the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics of conventional PPI formulations, which provide a single drug release. Also, to consider approaches to extending the duration of acid suppression focusing on dexlansoprazole MR, a PPI with a novel Dual Delayed Release (DDR) formulation. Method, We reviewed the available literature regarding marketed and investigational PPIs. Results, Non-standard dosing of currently marketed PPIs has produced incremental advances in acid control. Multiple approaches are being evaluated to enhance acid suppression with PPIs. Dexlansoprazole MR is a DDR formulation of dexlansoprazole, an enantiomer of lansoprazole, with two distinct drug release periods to prolong the plasma dexlansoprazole concentration,time profile and extend duration of acid suppression. Clinical studies show that dexlansoprazole MR produces a dual-peak PK profile that maintains therapeutic plasma drug concentrations longer than lansoprazole, with a single-peak PK profile, and increases the percentage of time that intragastric pH >4. Conclusions, Novel drug delivery platforms, including the dexlansoprazole MR DDR formulation, may improve acid suppression and offer benefits over conventional single release PPI formulations. [source] Dasatinib 140 mg once daily versus 70 mg twice daily in patients with Ph-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia who failed imatinib: Results from a phase 3 study,,AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HEMATOLOGY, Issue 3 2010Michael B. Lilly Dasatinib 70 mg twice daily is indicated for Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph+ ALL) intolerant or resistant to imatinib. In patients with chronic-phase chronic myelogenous leukemia, once-daily dosing has similar efficacy with improved safety, compared with twice-daily dosing. A phase 3 study (n = 611) assessed the efficacy and safety of dasatinib 140 mg once daily versus 70 mg twice-daily in patients with advanced phase chronic myelogenous leukemia or Ph+ ALL resistant or intolerant to imatinib. Here, results from the Ph+ ALL subset (n = 84) with a 2-year follow-up are reported. Patients were randomly assigned to receive dasatinib either 140 mg once daily (n = 40) or 70 mg twice daily (n = 44). The rate of confirmed major hematologic response with once-daily dosing (38%) was similar to that with twice-daily dosing (32%). The rate of major cytogenetic response with once-daily dosing (70%) was higher than that with twice-daily dosing (52%). Compared with the twice-daily schedule, the once-daily schedule had longer progression-free survival (median, 3.0 months versus 4.0 months, respectively) and shorter overall survival (median, 9.1 months versus 6.5 months, respectively). Overall safety profiles were similar between two groups, with nonhematologic adverse events being mostly grade 1 or 2. Pleural effusion was less frequent with once-daily dosing than with twice-daily dosing (all grades, 18% versus 32%). Notably, none of the differences between the two schedules was statistically significant. Compared with the 70 mg twice daily, dasatinib 140 mg once daily had similar overall efficacy and safety in patients with imatinib-resistant or intolerant Ph+ ALL. (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00123487). Am. J. Hematol. 2010. © 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] | ||||||||||