Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Mild Side-effects (mild + side-effect)
Selected AbstractsA Community-Based Study of Helicobacter pylori Therapy Using the Strategy of Test, Treat, Retest, and Re-treat Initial Treatment FailuresHELICOBACTER, Issue 5 2006Yi-Chia Lee Abstract Background:, Although eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection can decrease the risk of gastric cancer, the optimal regimen for treating the general population remains unclear. We report the eradication rate (intention-to-treat and per protocol) of a community-based H. pylori therapy using the strategy of test, treat, retest, and re-treat initial treatment failures. Materials and methods:, In 2004, a total of 2658 residents were recruited for 13C-urea breath testing. Participants with positive results for infection received a standard 7-day triple therapy (esomeprazole 40 mg once daily, amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, and clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily), and a 10-day re-treatment (esomeprazole 40 mg once daily, amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, and levofloxacin 500 mg once daily) if the follow-up tests remained positive. Both H. pylori status and side-effects were assessed 6 weeks after treatment. Results:, Among 886 valid reporters, eradication rates with initial therapy were 86.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 84.7,89.1%) and 88.7% (95%CI: 86.5,90.9%) by intention-to-treat and per protocol analysis, respectively. Re-treatment eradicated infection in 91.4% (95%CI: 86,96.8%) of 105 nonresponders. Adequate compliance was achieved in 798 (90.1%) of 886 subjects receiving the initial treatment and in all 105 re-treated subjects. Mild side-effects occurred in 24% of subjects. Overall intention-to-treat and per protocol eradication rates were 97.7% (95%CI: 96.7,98.7%) and 98.8% (95%CI: 98.5,99.3%), respectively, which were only affected by poor compliance (odds ratio, 3.3; 95%CI, 1.99,5.48; p < .0001). Conclusions:, A comprehensive plan using drugs in which the resistance rate is low in a population combined with the strategy of test, treat, retest, and re-treat of needed can result in virtual eradication of H. pylori from a population. This provides a model for planning country- or region-wide eradication programs. [source] Efficacy of risperidone in the treatment of delirium in elderly patientsPSYCHOGERIATRICS, Issue 2 2008Koji IKEZAWA Abstract Background:, Despite increasing recognition of delirium as a serious complication of physical illness, little has been reported in this area. Interest has been raised in treatment options other than haloperidol, such as atypical antipsychotic agents. Methods:, A 2-week open-label trial of risperidone for the treatment of delirium was conducted to assess the efficacy and tolerance of this medication in elderly patients. Twenty-two patients with DSM-IV-defined delirium were investigated. All patients had the hyperactive,hyperalert variant of delirium. Patients received a fixed dose of risperidone (mean 1.5 ± 0.7 mg; range 0.5,3 mg). Delirium was assessed using the Delirium Rating Scale (DRS) at baseline and on Days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 14 after the initiation of risperidone treatment. Clinical and demographic data, as well as risperidone therapy related information, were collected. Results:, Delirium resolved in all patients over the course of treatment. The mean period over which delirium resolved was 4.0 ± 2.9 days. The mean DRS score at baseline was 20.7 ± 3.0. The DRS score improved from baseline to Day 1 of treatment and continued to improve until the study end-point. Mild side-effects were present in 27.3% of patients. Stepwise logistic regression identified a decrease of 2 points or higher on the DRS on Day 1 associated with side-effects. There were no significant differences in the response to treatment with the different doses of risperidone used. Conclusion:, Our findings indicate that low-dose risperidone (0.5,3.0 mg/day) is effective and safe for the treatment of delirium in elderly patients, and that an early response on Day 1 of treatment may be associated with side-effects in these patients. [source] Oral R115866 in the treatment of moderate to severe facial acne vulgaris: an exploratory studyBRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, Issue 1 2007C.J. Verfaille Summary Background, R115866 (RambazoleTM; Barrier Therapeutics NV, Geel, Belgium), a new-generation retinoic acid metabolism-blocking agent, is a nonretinoid compound enhancing intracellularly the endogenous levels of all- trans -retinoic acid by blocking its catabolism. By virtue of this property, and the proven positive effects of retinoids in the treatment of acne, R115866 could potentially be a useful drug for acne. Objectives, To explore the efficacy, safety and tolerability of systemic R115866 in male patients with moderate to severe facial acne vulgaris (at least 15 papules and/or pustules and at least two nodulocystic lesions). Methods, In this exploratory trial, 17 patients were treated with oral R115866 1 mg once daily for 12 weeks, followed by a 4-week treatment-free period. Results, At the end of treatment (week 12, n = 16) a mean reduction in inflammatory lesion count of 77·4% (P < 0·001), in noninflammatory lesion count of 58·3% (P < 0·001) and in total lesion count of 76·0% (P < 0·001) was observed as compared with baseline. All lesion counts were significantly reduced from week 4 onwards. Mild side-effects were reported occasionally. Conclusions, The current data indicate that treatment with oral R115866 1 mg once daily for 12 weeks in patients with moderate to severe facial acne vulgaris is efficacious and well tolerated and merits further investigation. [source] Epistaxis during Treatment with PaclitaxelBASIC AND CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY, Issue 3 2009Nirit Yarom Patients who were treated with paclitaxel filled a questionnaire regarding their general health, medications and incidents of epistaxis. Relevant clinical information was obtained from the patients' charts. Forty-seven consecutive patients were recruited to the study. Twenty-four (51%) of the patients reported epistaxis during paclitaxel therapy. Twenty-three of 39 (59%) patients who received weekly paclitaxel had epistaxis at least once during treatment, compared with one out of eight patients who were treated every 3 weeks (P = 0.045). All episodes of epistaxis were mild, occurred with normal platelets counts and did not require blood product transfusions or treatment modification. The majority of the patients experienced the first episode of epistaxis on the third week of weekly paclitaxel treatment and then repeatedly throughout therapy. It is concluded that epistaxis is a common mild side-effect of weekly paclitaxel that has not been reported previously. In this trial, epistaxis did not have any major clinical consequences. However, when paclitaxel is combined with other drugs that may cause bleeding, such as bevacizumab, physicians should be alerted to the potential risk of this phenomenon. [source] Clinical efficacy of sublingual and subcutaneous birch pollen allergen-specific immunotherapy: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy studyALLERGY, Issue 1 2004M. S. Khinchi Background:, Both sublingual allergen-specific immunotherapy (SLIT) and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) have a documented clinical efficacy, but only few comparative studies have been performed. Objective:, To investigate the clinical efficacy of SLIT vs SCIT and secondary to compare SLIT and SCIT with placebo and to evaluate the relative clinical efficacy in relation to systemic side-effects. Methods:, A 3-year randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy study including 71 adult birch pollen hay fever patients treated for two consecutive years after a baseline year. Allocation to treatment groups was based on disease severity in the baseline season, gender and age. Results:, Clinical efficacy was estimated in 58 patients completing the first treatment year by subtracting baseline data and by calculating the ratio first treatment season vs baseline. SLIT diminished the median disease severity to one-half and SCIT to one-third of placebo treatment. No statistical significant difference between the two groups was observed. Both for symptoms and medication scores actively treated patients showed statistically significant and clinical relevant efficacy compared with placebo. SLIT treatment only resulted in local mild side-effects, while SCIT resulted in few serious systemic side-effects. Conclusion:, Based on the limited number of patients the clinical efficacy of SLIT was not statistically different from SCIT, and both treatments are clinically effective compared with placebo in the treatment of birch pollen rhinoconjunctivitis. The lack of significant difference between the two treatments does not indicate equivalent efficacy, but to detect minor differences necessitates investigation of larger groups. Due to the advantageous safety profile SLIT may be favored. [source] | ||||||||||