Liposomal amphotericin B. Therapeutic use in the management of fungal infections and visceral leishmaniasis

Incorporation of amphotericin B into small unilamellar liposomes (AmBisome) alters the pharmacokinetic properties of the drug, but allows it to retain significant in vitro and in vivo activity against fungal species, including Candida, Aspergillus and Cryptococcus, and parasites of the genus Leishmania. Used as prophylaxis against fungal infections in immunocompromised patients, liposomal amphotericin B appeared to reduce the incidence of both fungal colonisation and proven fungal infections, but did not affect overall survival. Empirical therapy with liposomal amphotericin B in immunocompromised adults or children with suspected fungal infections was at least as effective as therapy with conventional amphotericin B. In the largest noncomparative studies, liposomal amphotericin B produced mycological eradication in 40 and 83% of patients with proven Candida infections and 41 and 60% with proven Aspergillus infections; however, these studies included relatively few patients. Mycological eradication rates of 67 to 85% in patients with cryptococcal meningitis have been reported. Liposomal amphotericin B is an effective treatment for visceral leishmaniasis in immunocompetent adults and children, including those with severe or drug-resistant disease. The drug also produces good response rates in immunocompromised patients; however, relapse rates in these patients are high. Liposomal amphotericin B is generally well tolerated. Few patients require discontinuation or dose reduction of the drug because of adverse events. The most frequently reported adverse events are hypokalaemia, nephrotoxicity and infusion-related reactions; however, these occur significantly less often after liposomal amphotericin B than after the conventional formulation of the drug. The acquisition cost of liposomal amphotericin B is higher than that of conventional amphotericin B. Cost-effectiveness analysis did not clearly show an economic benefit for empirical liposomal amphotericin B antifungal therapy in adults; however, one model suggested that initial empirical therapy with the liposomal formulation in children may cost less per cure than initial therapy with the conventional formulation. Liposomal amphotericin B appears to be an effective alternative to conventional amphotericin B in the management of immunocompromised patients with proven or suspected fungal infections. Use of the drug is facilitated by its greatly improved tolerability profile compared with conventional amphotericin B. Because of this, liposomal amphotericin should be preferred to conventional amphotericin B in the management of suspected or proven fungal infections in immunocompromised patients with pre-existing renal dysfunction, amphotericin B-induced toxicity or failure to respond to conventional amphotericin B. Liposomal amphotericin B may also be considered for first- or second-line treatment of immunocompetent patients with visceral leishmaniasis.     

A case of visceral leishmaniasis in Austria

We report a patient aged 41 years with fever of unknown origin. Notable aspects of his travel history were a trip to the Philippines and a sailing trip around Sicily. The patient presented with fever up to 40 degrees C since 4 weeks, weakness, headache, hepatosplenomegaly and night sweat. No specific cause could be found. Based on clinical findings tuberculosis was suspected and empirical tuberculostatic treatment was started. However, during the following 6 weeks the patient's condition deteriorated. A bone marrow biopsy performed to exclude a haematological malignancy revealed Leishmania sp. in macrophages. This histological diagnosis was confirmed retrospectively by re-examination of a previously performed liver biopsy and by an increased anti-leishmania serum antibody titer of 1:1280. The patient was treated with sodium stibogluconate (pentostam, 850 mg) for 30 days and recovered slowly.     

Efficacies of KY62 against Leishmania amazonensis and Leishmania donovani in experimental murine cutaneous leishmaniasis and visceral leishmaniasis

Carcass measurements of 12th-rib fat thickness (CARCFAT), longissimus muscle area (CARCLMA), and weight (CARCWT) on 2,028 Brangus and Brangus-sired fed steers and heifers, as well as yearling weights (YWT) and ultrasound measures of 12th-rib fat thickness (USFAT) and longissimus muscle area (USLMA) on 3,583 Brangus bulls and heifers were analyzed to estimate genetic parameters. Data were analyzed using a six-trait animal model and an average information REML algorithm. The model included fixed effects for contemporary group and breed of dam, covariates for age at slaughter or measurement, and random animal and residual effects. Heritabilities for CARCFAT, CARCLMA, CARCWT, USFAT, USLMA, and YWT were .27+/-.05, .39+/-.05, .59+/-.06, .11+/-.03, .29+/-.04, and .40+/-.04, respectively. Genetic correlations between CARCFAT and USFAT, CARCLMA and USLMA, and CARCWT and YWT were .69+/-.18, .66+/-.14, and .61+/-.11, respectively. The favorable and moderately strong genetic correlations between carcass measurements and similar yearling breeding-animal ultrasound measurements indicate that such measurements of 12th-rib fat and longissimus muscle area are useful in predicting genetic values for carcass leanness and longissimus muscle area. Selection using yearling ultrasound measurements of breeding cattle should result in predictable genetic improvement for carcass characteristics. Inclusion of yearling ultrasound measurements for fat thickness and longissimus muscle area should enhance national cattle evaluation programs.     

Azithromycin. A review of its pharmacological properties and use as 3-day therapy in respiratory tract infections

The azalide antibacterial agent azithromycin is a semisynthetic acid-stable erythromycin derivative with an expanded spectrum of activity and improved tissue pharmacokinetic characteristics relative to erythromycin. The drug is noted for its activity against some Gram-negative organisms associated with respiratory tract infections, particularly Haemophilus influenzae. Azithromycin has similar activity to other macrolides against Streptococcus pneumoniae and Moraxella catarrhalis, and is active against atypical pathogens such as Legionella pneumophila, Chlamydia pneumoniae and Mycoplasma pneumoniae. Once-daily administration of azithromycin is made possible by the long elimination half-life of the drug from tissue. Azithromycin is rapidly and highly concentrated in a number of cell types after absorption, including leucocytes, monocytes and macrophages. It undergoes extensive distribution into tissue, from where it is subsequently eliminated slowly. A 3-day oral regimen of once-daily azithromycin has been shown to be as effective as 5- to 10-day courses of other more frequently administered antibacterial agents [such as erythromycin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid and phenoxymethylpenicillin (penicillin V)] in patients with acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis, pneumonia, sinusitis, pharyngitis, tonsillitis and otitis media. Adverse effects of azithromycin are mainly gastrointestinal in nature and occur less frequently than with erythromycin. Azithromycin is likely to prove most useful as a 3-day regimen in the empirical management of respiratory tract infections in the community. Its ease of administration and 3-day duration of therapy, together with its good gastrointestinal tolerability, should optimise patient compliance (the highest level of which is achieved with once-daily regimens). Azithromycin is also likely to be useful in the hospital setting, particularly for outpatients and for those unable to tolerate erythromycin.     

Milnacipran. A review of its use in depression

Milnacipran is a cyclopropane derivative which acts by inhibiting noradrenaline (norepinephrine) and serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine; 5-HT) reuptake at presynaptic sites; no postsynaptic receptor activity has been demonstrated. It is most commonly administered at a dosage of 50 mg twice daily for the treatment of major depressive disorder. Improvement usually occurs within 2 weeks of treatment initiation, but some patients do respond sooner. Most studies which evaluated milnacipran were of short (4 to 8 weeks) duration and results were not published in full with rigorous peer review. Nonetheless, the drug is significantly more effective than placebo for the treatment of in- or outpatients with moderate to severe major depressive disorder. Limited data suggest that it may prevent relapse and be effective for long term use, although this requires confirmation. Milnacipran 200 mg/day is generally not significantly different from amitriptyline 150 mg/day in terms of onset and efficacy. However, when doses are titrated (not a requirement for milnacipran), milnacipran 50 or 100 mg/day has a slower onset than the tricyclic antidepressant. At a dosage of 100 mg/day for 4 to 12 weeks, milnacipran generally has similar efficacy to imipramine and clomipramine 150 mg/day, although milnacipran 50 to 150 mg/day had a faster onset of activity than imipramine 50 to 150 mg/day in Japanese patients. In a 6-month trial, milnacipran was less effective than clomipramine. Milnacipran 50 or 100 mg twice daily was as effective as fluoxetine 20 mg once daily or fluvoxamine 100 mg twice daily in 4- to 12-week studies. At a dosage of 50 then 100 mg daily it was also as effective as mianserin 30 then 60 mg daily in a 4-week study. However, when administered once daily (in the evening), milnacipran 100 mg/day was not as effective as fluoxetine 20 mg/day after 6 weeks. The drug is generally well tolerated, producing no more adverse events (including anticholinergic events) than placebo, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or mianserin and fewer adverse events than tricyclic antidepressants in clinical trials. However, dysuria has been reported in 7% of male patients receiving milnacipran. CONCLUSIONS: Data from predominantly short term trials suggest that milnacipran generally has similar efficacy to tricyclic antidepressants and SSRIs. Although further published data are required to confirm its efficacy, good tolerability profile and pharmacokinetic profile which suggests a low potential for drug interactions, milnacipran should be considered a promising agent for the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder.     

Rivastigmine. A review of its use in Alzheimer's disease

Rivastigmine (SDZ ENA 713) is a carbamylating, long-acting reversible and noncompetitive carbamate acetylcholinesterase inhibitor that is indicated as an oral treatment for patients with mild to moderately severe Alzheimer's disease. The drug has been evaluated for this use in 3 well designed, adequately powered, phase II/III, 26-week clinical trials that included a total of 1479 rivastigmine and 647 placebo recipients. Most of these patients had concomitant disorders that were being treated with numerous other drugs. Individual and pooled results of these trials indicate that rivastigmine 6 to 12 mg/day usually produces cognitive, global and functional changes that indicate significantly less deterioration than was observed with placebo in patients with mild to moderately severe Alzheimer's disease. Individual results of the 2 pivotal trials and pooled analysis also show that, compared with placebo recipients, significantly more rivastigmine 6 to 12 mg/day recipients respond to therapy. Indeed, after 26 weeks of therapy in the 2 pivotal trials, significantly more rivastigmine 6 to 12 mg/day than placebo recipients achieved clinically meaningful improvements as defined by 3 separate response criteria. The lower dosage range of 1 to 4 mg/day was not as effective as 6 to 12 mg/day, as measured using these criteria and other efficacy parameters. Rivastigmine causes adverse events that are generally those expected from an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor. They are usually mild to moderate, of short duration and responsive to dosage reduction. Unpublished data from 3989 patients indicate that rivastigmine and placebo were associated with similar incidences of serious adverse events and changes in laboratory parameters, ECG and cardiorespiratory vital signs. The most common events were gastrointestinal, central and peripheral nervous system and whole body adverse events. However, compared with placebo, rivastigmine more commonly caused adverse events resulting in treatment withdrawal. These events were most frequently gastrointestinal and were more common in women. CONCLUSION: Rivastigmine is a useful option for the treatment of patients with mild to moderately severe Alzheimer's disease. Although only short term (6- month) comparisons with placebo are available, given the lack of established treatment options it should be considered for first-line use in this population.     

Domperidone. A review of its use in diabetic gastropathy

Domperidone is a selective antagonist at peripheral dopamine D2 receptors, with gastroprokinetic and antiemetic properties. It increases the frequency and duration of antral and duodenal contractions, thus decreasing/improving transit time of food through the gastrointestinal tract. Gastric emptying of liquids and solids is significantly improved with oral domperidone 40 to 120 mg/day in patients with diabetic gastropathy. Oral domperidone 40 to 80 mg/day significantly decreased the severity of symptoms of gastropathy from baseline values in 66 to 88% of patients with type 1 (insulin-dependent) or insulin-requiring diabetes mellitus. Double-blind withdrawal of domperidone from patients who had responded previously led to greater deterioration of symptoms in patients with delayed gastric emptying than in those who continued receiving the drug. Quality of life was significantly improved in patients who showed a symptomatic response to domperidone. The administration of domperidone 40 to 120 mg/day significantly reduced hospitalisation rates in patients with gastropathy. The symptomatic improvement with domperidone 80 mg/day was similar to that seen with cisapride 40 mg/day or metoclopramide 40 mg/day, and therapeutic benefits seen in symptoms of gastropathy were maintained with domperidone for up to 12 years. Domperidone 40 to 80 mg/day may be effective in patients who are refractory to metoclopramide, and a combination of domperidone 80 mg/day with cisapride 80 mg/day may improve some symptoms in patients who do not respond to either agent alone. Domperidone 40 to 120 mg/day was well tolerated for periods up to 12 years in trials in patients with diabetic gastropathy. Adverse events with domperidone 80 mg/day were similar to those seen in placebo recipients and significantly fewer than in patients receiving metoclopramide 40 mg/day. Although significant elevation of plasma prolactin levels (unrelated to dosage and duration of treatment) occurred in all domperidone recipients, prolactin-related adverse events were observed in only 10 to 20% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The available data suggest that domperidone 40 to 80 mg/day is an effective agent for the management of symptoms of gastropathy in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. In addition, it may provide symptom improvement in patients with gastropathy refractory to other gastroprokinetic agents. Domperidone maintains efficacy in the long term (up to 12 years) and appears to have a better tolerability profile than metoclopramide 40 mg/day.     

Azithromycin. A review of its use in paediatric infectious diseases

Azithromycin is an azalide antimicrobial agent active in vitro against major pathogens responsible for infections of the respiratory tract, skin and soft tissues in children. Pathogens that are generally susceptible to azithromycin include Haemophilus influenzae (including ampicillin-resistant strains), Moraxella catarrhalis, Chlamydia pneumoniae, Chlamydia trachomatis, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Legionella spp., Streptococcus pyogenes and Streptococcus agalactiae. Azithromycin is also generally active against erythromycin- and penicillin-susceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus. Azithromycin is administered once daily, achieves clinically relevant concentrations at sites of infection, is slowly eliminated from the body and has few drug interactions. In children, azithromycin is usually given as either a 3-day course of 10 mg/kg/day or a 5-day course with 10 mg/kg on the first day, followed by 5 mg/kg/day for a further 4 days. These standard regimens were as effective as amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, clarithromycin, cefaclor and amoxicillin in the treatment of children with otitis media. Azithromycin was also as effective as either phenoxymethylpenicillin (penicillin V), erythromycin, clarithromycin or cefaclor against streptococcal pharyngitis or tonsillitis in children, but appears to result in more recurrence of infection than phenoxymethylpenicillin in this indication, necessitating a dosage of 12 mg/kg/day for 5 days. Community-acquired pneumonia, bronchitis and other respiratory tract infections in children responded as well to azithromycin as to amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, cefaclor, erythromycin or josamycin. Azithromycin was similar or superior to ceftibuten in mixed general practice populations of patients. However, symptoms of lower respiratory tract infections resolved more rapidly with azithromycin than with erythromycin, josamycin or cefaclor. Skin and soft tissue infections responded as well to azithromycin as to cefaclor, dicloxacillin or flucloxacillin, and oral azithromycin was as effective as ocular tetracycline in treating trachoma. Although not as well tolerated as phenoxymethylpenicillin in the treatment of streptococcal pharyngitis, azithromycin is at least as well tolerated as most other agents used to treat respiratory tract and other infections in children and was better tolerated than amoxicillin/clavulanic acid. Adverse events that do occur are mostly gastrointestinal and tend to be mild to moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: Azithromycin is an effective and well tolerated alternative to first-line agents in the treatment of respiratory tract, skin and soft tissue infections in children, offerring the convenience of a short, once-daily regimen.     

Tirofiban. A review of its use in acute coronary syndromes

Tirofiban is an intravenously administered nonpeptide glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist which specifically inhibits fibrinogen-dependent platelet aggregation and prolongs bleeding times in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation returns to near-baseline levels within 4 to 8 hours after cessation of a tirofiban infusion, a finding consistent with the drug's elimination half-life of approximately 2 hours. Three large clinical trials have shown that, when administered with a standard heparin and aspirin regimen, tirofiban reduces the risk of ischaemic complications in patients with unstable angina/non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI) and in patients undergoing percutaneous revascularisation. In PRISM-PLUS, a study involving 1915 patients with unstable angina/non-Q-wave MI, administration of intravenous tirofiban (0.4 microgram/kg/min loading dose for 30 minutes followed by a 0.10 microgram/kg/min infusion) with heparin for at least 48 (mean 71.3) hours reduced the 7-day risk of the composite end-point of MI, death and refractory ischaemia by 32% compared with heparin alone. The between-group risk reduction remained significant at 30 days (22%) and 6 months (19%). Similarly, in high-risk patients undergoing coronary angioplasty in RESTORE, the addition of tirofiban (10 micrograms/kg bolus in the 3 minutes prior to intervention followed by 0.15 microgram/kg/min for 36 hours) to a standard heparin regimen significantly reduced the risk of ischaemic complications by 38% on day 2 and 27% on day 7 compared with heparin alone. Although interim analysis in PRISM-PLUS showed that the use of tirofiban without heparin increased the 7-day risk of death compared with heparin alone, this finding was inconsistent with the effects of tirofiban on the risk of death in PRISM, a study involving 3232 patients with unstable angina/non-Q-wave MI. Tirofiban is generally well tolerated. Bleeding complications were the most commonly reported events associated with tirofiban in clinical trials, but the rate of major bleeding in tirofiban recipients was not significantly different from that reported with heparin. Thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 90,000 cells/microliter) occurred slightly more frequently with tirofiban (with or without heparin) than with heparin alone. CONCLUSIONS: Tirofiban reduces the risk of ischaemic complications in patients with unstable angina/non-Q-wave MI and high-risk patients undergoing revascularisation when used against a background of heparin and aspirin. Furthermore, the drug has an acceptable tolerability profile. Therefore, intravenous tirofiban is likely to be used as an adjunct to heparin and aspirin in patients with acute coronary syndromes including high-risk patients undergoing revascularisation.     

Candesartan cilexetil. A review of its use in essential hypertension

Candesartan cilexetil is completely converted to the nonpeptide angiotensin II receptor blocker candesartan during absorption from the gastrointestinal tract. Candesartan selectively blocks and dissociates slowly from the angiotensin II subtype 1 (AT1) receptor which mediates most of the known activities of angiotensin II. When administered once daily, oral candesartan cilexetil 8 to 32 mg dose-dependently and effectively reduces blood pressure in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. In comparative studies, candesartan cilexetil 8 mg/day was as effective as usual therapeutic dosages of enalapril, losartan potassium, hydrochlorothiazide and amlodipine. One study showed candesartan cilexetil 16 mg/day to be more effective than losartan potassium 50 mg/day. Furthermore, the combination of candesartan cilexetil with either hydrochlorothiazide or amlodipine resulted in additive antihypertensive effects. Preliminary evidence suggests that the blood pressure-lowering effects of candesartan cilexetil are associated with the prevention or improvement of end-organ damage in patients with hypertension. However, this requires further confirmation in clinical studies. Candesartan cilexetil improves insulin sensitivity in patients with hypertension and does not affect glucose homeostasis or the serum lipid profile in those with coexisting type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Candesartan cilexetil is well tolerated in patients with hypertension. Pooled data indicate that the tolerability profile of the drug is not significantly different from that of placebo, with headache being the most commonly reported event. Adverse events are not dose related and are mostly mild to moderate in severity. Candesartan cilexetil is better tolerated than enalapril, primarily because of a reduced incidence of cough, and was not associated with the hypokalaemia or hyperuricaemia seen with hydrochlorothiazide in a study in patients aged > or = 75 years. The drug has an adverse events profile similar to that of losartan potassium in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. Conclusions: once daily candesartan cilexetil is effective and well tolerated when used once daily (as monotherapy or in combination with other antihypertensive agents) in patients with mild, moderate or severe hypertension. Initially, however, the drug is likely to be used as an alternative to other agents in patients not responding to or intolerant of their current drug therapy.     

Ofloxacin. A reappraisal of its use in the management of genitourinary tract infections

Ofloxacin is an established fluoroquinolone agent which achieves good concentrations in genitourinary tract tissues and fluids. It has good in vitro activity against most Enterobacteriaceae, Staphylococcus saprophyticus, methicillin-susceptible S. aureus, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis and Haemophilus ducreyi, intermediate activity against Ureaplasma urealyticum and most enterococci, but limited or no in vitro activity against enterococci, Serratia marcescens, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and many anaerobes. However, high concentrations achieved in the urine ensure its activity against most urinary tract pathogens. Ofloxacin demonstrates consistent efficacy in a broad range of urinary tract infections, achieving bacteriological response rates in excess of 80% in uncomplicated and 70% in complicated infections. The efficacy of ofloxacin was similar to that of all comparators tested including other fluoroquinolones, cephalosporins and cotrimoxazole (trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole). Ofloxacin is also effective as a single-dose regimen in the treatment of uncomplicated gonorrhoea, as a 7-day regimen in uncomplicated C. trachomatis infections, and as monotherapy in uncomplicated pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). Again, ofloxacin demonstrated similar efficacy to alternative treatments in each type of infection. The availability of an intravenous formulation and near-complete oral bioavailability allow ofloxacin to be administered as a sequential regimen without loss of activity. The tolerability and drug interaction profile of ofloxacin is consistent with that of other fluoroquinolones. The most commonly reported adverse events with ofloxacin are gastrointestinal, neurological and dermatological. It was associated with a lower incidence of photosensitivity and tendinitis and higher incidence of some neurological events than some other fluoroquinolones. Ofloxacin seems to have a lower propensity to interact with xanthines than other fluoroquinolones. Conclusion: ofloxacin has established efficacy in the treatment of a wide variety of urinary tract infections, although, like other fluoroquinolones, it should be used rationally to preserve its activity. Currently, ofloxacin also holds an important place among fluoroquinolones in the treatment of C. trachomatis infections and uncomplicated PID, although its acceptance as monotherapy in PID is likely to depend on clarification of the causative role of anaerobic pathogens in this infection.     

Mexiletine. A review of its therapeutic use in painful diabetic neuropathy

Mexiletine is an orally active local anaesthetic agent which is structurally related to lidocaine (lignocaine) and has been used for alleviating neuropathic pain of various origins. Mexiletine has been evaluated in several randomised, placebo-controlled trials in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy. The drug decreased mean visual analogue scale (VAS) pain ratings in all studies that used this measure, although in only 2 studies was this effect significantly greater than the often substantial responses seen with placebo. The clinical significance of these decreases is not clear. Statistically significant (vs placebo) reductions in VAS pain ratings were observed in 16 patients receiving mexiletine 10 mg/kg/day for 10 weeks in 1 study and in nocturnal (but not diurnal) pain in 31 patients receiving mexiletine 675 mg/day for 3 weeks in another. Retrospective analysis of another study revealed that mexiletine recipients (225 to 675 mg/day) who described their pain as stabbing, burning or formication on the pain-rating-index-total instrument of the McGill Pain Questionnaire, experienced statistically significant reductions in VAS pain scores after 5 weeks, compared with placebo recipients. Mexiletine generally did not have a significant influence on the quality of sleep in patients with diabetic neuropathy. In Japanese patients, statistically significant reductions in subjective pain ratings were achieved with mexiletine 300 mg/day in 1 study and with 450 mg/day in a further study. In controlled trials, the frequency of adverse events in patients receiving mexiletine for painful diabetic neuropathy ranged from 13.5 to 50%. Gastrointestinal complaints, of which nausea was the most frequent, were the most common adverse events in mexiletine recipients. Central nervous system complaints were uncommon, but included: sleep disturbance, headache, shakiness, dizziness and tiredness. Serious cardiac arrhythmias have not been reported in patients receiving mexiletine for painful diabetic neuropathy; however, transient tachycardia and palpitations have been reported. There are significant differences in the metabolism of mexiletine between people who have cytochrome P450 2D6 [CYP2D6; extensive metabolisers (EMs)] and those who lack this isoenzyme [poor metabolisers (PMs)]. EMs, but not PMs, are susceptible to drug interactions between mexiletine and drugs that inhibit CYP2D6 (e.g. quinidine). Moreover, mexiletine inhibits CYP2D6-mediated metabolism of metoprolol and cytochrome P450 1A2-mediated metabolism of theophylline. Phenytoin and rifampicin (rifampin) induce the metabolism of mexiletine. Clearance of mexiletine is impaired in patients with hepatic, but not renal, dysfunction. Hence, dosage adjustments may be necessary in patients with liver disease. CONCLUSIONS: Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) are the agents of choice for painful diabetic neuropathy; however, they are ineffective in approximately 50% of patients and are generally not well tolerated. Mexiletine is an alternative agent for the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy in patients who have not had a satisfactory response to, or cannot tolerate, TCAs and/or other drugs.     

Mometasone furoate. A review of its intranasal use in allergic rhinitis

Mometasone furoate is a synthetic corticosteroid which has been evaluated for intranasal use in the treatment of adults and children with allergic rhinitis. In several large, well-controlled clinical trials, mometasone furoate 200 micrograms administered once daily as an aqueous intranasal spray was significantly more effective than placebo in controlling the symptoms associated with moderate to severe seasonal or perennial allergic rhinitis. Mometasone furoate was as effective as twice-daily beclomethasone dipropionate or once-daily fluticasone propionate in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis, and was as effective as twice-daily beclomethasone dipropionate and slightly more effective than once-daily oral loratadine in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Mometasone furoate was also as effective as twice-daily beclomethasone dipropionate or once-daily budesonide, and significantly more effective than placebo in the prophylaxis of seasonal allergic rhinitis. The onset of action of mometasone furoate was approximately 7 hours in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Mometasone furoate was as well tolerated as beclomethasone dipropionate, fluticasone propionate and budesonide in clinical trials, with an overall incidence of adverse events similar to placebo. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate and of limited duration. The most common adverse events associated with mometasone furoate therapy were nasal irritation and/or burning, headache, epistaxis and pharyngitis. Intranasal or oral mometasone furoate had no detectable effect on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function in studies of < or = 1 year in duration. CONCLUSIONS: Mometasone furoate is a well tolerated intranasal corticosteroid with minimal systemic activity and an onset of action of < or = 7 hours. It is effective in the prophylaxis and treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis and the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis in patients with moderate to severe symptoms.     

Moexipril. A review of its use in the management of essential hypertension

Moexipril is a prodrug which is hydrolysed after oral administration to its active metabolite moexiprilat, an inhibitor of the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE). Once daily administration of moexipril 7.5 or 15 mg effectively reduces blood pressure in patients with essential hypertension (including the elderly and postmenopausal women with this condition). In double-blind randomised comparative studies, moexipril 7.5 to 15 mg once daily showed similar efficacy to other antihypertensive agents, including captopril, hydrochlorothiazide, atenolol, metoprolol, sustained release verapamil and nitrendipine. Combined therapy with hydrochlorothiazide and moexipril had a significantly greater antihypertensive effect than either agent alone. Moexipril is well tolerated by the majority of patients and compares well in this respect with other antihypertensive agents. Its tolerability profile appears to be characteristic of ACE inhibitors as a class (the most common adverse events being headache, symptoms of upper respiratory tract infection and cough). Moexipril generally had no clinically significant effect on lipid, glucose or electrolyte metabolism or haematological parameters, and, in particular, it was not associated with any significant changes in lipid or glucose metabolism in postmenopausal women (with or without hormone replacement therapy). CONCLUSIONS: Once daily moexipril is a useful agent for the treatment of essential hypertension, which compares well with currently available options in terms of clinical efficacy and tolerability. In addition, clinical experience to date supports its use in postmenopausal women.     

First case in Russia of coinfection of visceral leishmaniasis and HIV-infection

New clinical information systems use client-server software applications that require knowledge of personal computers, Microsoft Windows, and mouse control. Here, the authors describe a low-cost training method to supplement classroom teaching.     

Sumatriptan. An updated review of its use in migraine

Sumatriptan is a selective agonist at serotonin 5-HT1-like receptors, including 5-HT1B/1D subtypes. It is an effective treatment for acute migraine attacks and the injectable form has also shown efficacy in the treatment of cluster headaches. In placebo-controlled clinical trials, sumatriptan, administered subcutaneously, orally, intranasally or rectally was significantly more effective than placebo in relieving migraine headache and in producing resolution or reduction of other symptoms associated with migraine, including nausea, photophobia and phonophobia. Improvements in clinical disability were also significantly greater after sumatriptan than after placebo. Headache recurred in 21 to 57% of patients who received oral or subcutaneous sumatriptan, but most patients responded to a second dose of the drug. Results of comparative trials showed that subcutaneous sumatriptan 6 mg was significantly more effective than either patients' usual antimigraine treatments or intranasal dihydroergotamine mesylate 1 mg in relieving migraine headache. Subcutaneous sumatriptan 6 mg and subcutaneous dihydroergotamine mesylate 1 mg provided similarly effective migraine relief, but the headache recurrence rate was significantly higher after sumatriptan than after this formulation of dihydroergotamine mesylate. Response rates achieved after oral sumatriptan were similar to those reported after treatment with oral naratriptan, rizatriptan or lysine acetylsalicylate plus metoclopramide. Treatment of acute migraine attacks with oral or subcutaneous sumatriptan leads to less loss of workplace productivity than other antimigraine therapies. Several pharmacoeconomic analyses showed that gains in workplace productivity in sumatriptan recipients ranged from 12.1 to 89.8 hours per patient per year. Significant improvements from baseline in overall health-related quality-of-life scores were also experienced by sumatriptan recipients. Sumatriptan is generally well tolerated. Nausea, vomiting, malaise and fatigue are the most common adverse events with oral sumatriptan. Injection site reactions occur in 10 to 40% of patients receiving the drug subcutaneously. A bitter taste at the back of the mouth occurs frequently after intranasal administration. Serious adverse events occur in about 0.14% of patients with migraine treated with sumatriptan. As the drug is associated with the rare development of cardiovascular effects, it is contraindicated in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease. CONCLUSIONS: Despite its relatively high acquisition cost, reductions in lost workplace productivity experienced by patients treated with sumatriptan may result in savings in the overall cost of migraine to society. Thus, sumatriptan is a useful first- or second-line treatment option for patients with moderate or severe migraine.     

Adverse effects of mouthwash use. A review

Many persons use mouthrinses as a part of their routine oral hygiene. Although rinses impart some benefits to users, improper use of mouthrinses may result in various side effects. This paper reviews the adverse effects of mouthwash use as reported in the English-language literature.     

The Hooper Visual Organization Test: A case against its use in neuropsychological assessment.

Questions J. L. Boyd's (see record 1982-20115-001) conclusions regarding the usefulness of the Hooper Visual Organization Test in neuropsychological assessment. It is concluded that the predictive value of Boyd's new cutoff score in an unselected series of acute-care-setting patients is not known, and Boyd did not examine the added value, or lack thereof, of the test's inclusion in a neuropsychological battery. (9 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Paroxetine. A review of its pharmacology, therapeutic use in depression and therapeutic potential in diabetic neuropathy

Paroxetine is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor effective in a once-daily administration regimen in the treatment of depression. In elderly patients (aged > or = 60 years) with major depression, short term (6 weeks) treatment with paroxetine produces clinical improvements significantly superior to those seen with placebo and similar to those with tricyclic antidepressant agents, mianserin and fluoxetine. There is evidence that paroxetine has positive effects on co-existing anxiety and does not precipitate agitation. Paroxetine has also shown potential in the symptomatic treatment of diabetic neuropathy; however, further clinical experience is needed to confirm this preliminary result. Short term paroxetine therapy is associated with fewer anticholinergic and CNS adverse effects, but generally more gastrointestinal disturbances, than tricyclic antidepressants and mianserin. Unlike the tricyclic agents, paroxetine does not significantly affect cardiovascular function or impair psychomotor performance. This tolerability profile should be particularly beneficial in elderly patients, who are generally more susceptible than younger patients to the anticholinergic and CNS adverse events associated with tricyclic antidepressant drugs, and in whom there is a higher prevalence of pre-existing cardiovascular disease. It also suggests an important potential advantage over tricyclic antidepressants in the setting of overdosage. Thus, primarily because of its better tolerability profile and potentially lower toxicity in overdosage and in patients with cardiovascular disease, paroxetine appears to be a more attractive option than tricyclic antidepressants for the treatment of depression in late life. Future research should attempt to define more fully the efficacy of paroxetine as long term prophylactic therapy for recurrent depression and to assess how its overall therapeutic profile compares with other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in the elderly.