DOCSLIB.ORG

Scottish Medicines Consortium

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Scottish Medicines Consortium Scottish Medicines Consortium diclofenac 1% gel patches (Voltarol Gel PatchÒ) No. (199/05) Novartis 9 September 2005 The Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) has completed its assessment of the above product and advises NHS Boards and Area Drug and Therapeutic Committees (ADTCs) on its use in NHS Scotland. The advice is summarised as follows: ADVICE: following a full submission Diclofenac 1% gel patch (Voltarol Gel PatchÒ) is not recommended for use within NHS Scotland for the local symptomatic treatment of pain in epicondylitis and ankle sprain. Diclofenac gel patch provides analgesia similar to that obtained with a topical gel formulation of this drug. However, on a gram per gram basis, patches cost over 40% more than the gel formulation. Overleaf is the detailed advice on this product. Chairman, Scottish Medicines Consortium 1 Diclofenac 1% gel patch (Voltarol Gel Patch®) Licensed indication under review Local symptomatic treatment of pain in epicondylitis and ankle sprain in adults. Dosing information under review Epicondylitis: one application morning and night for up to fourteen days. Ankle sprain: one application per day for up to three days. UK launch date 1 October 2005 Comparator medications Conditions included in the indications of diclofenac 1% gel patch, epicondylitis (tennis elbow) and ankle sprain could be treated topically with gel formulations of other non-steroidal anti- inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including diclofenac, ibuprofen, piroxicam, ketoprofen and felbinac or systemically with oral formulations of these drugs or simple analgesics such as paracetamol. Cost per treatment period and relevant comparators Daily dose Cost per course (£)* 3 days 14 days Diclofenac 1% gel patch one patch once 7.05 - Diclofenac 1% gel patch one patch twice - 42.30 Diclofenac 1% gel 2g to 4g three to four times 7.00 14.00- 21.00 Felbinac 3% gel 1g two to four times 7.00 7.00 Ketoprofen 2.5% gel 2.5g to 5 g two to four times 3.39-5.85 5.85-17.55 Piroxicam 0.5% gel 1g three to four times 3.63 3.63 Ibuprofen 10% gel 0.5g to 1.25g up to three times 3.22 3.22 *costs from submission and eVadis database accessed in July 2005 for the following preparations: Voltarol (diclofenac 1%) Gel Patch, sealed pouch of 5 patches £7.05; Voltarol (diclofenac 1%) EmulgelÒ or generic diclofenac 1% gel 100g £7; ketoprofen 2.5% gel 50g £3.39, 100g £5.85; piroxicam 0.5% gel 60g £3.63, 112g £6.19; Traxam (felbinac 3%) gel 100g £7.00; ibuprofen 10% 50g £3.22 2 Summary of evidence on comparative efficacy Diclofenac is an NSAID that reduces pain and inflammation by inhibiting an enzyme that produces some of the prostaglandins involved in inflammatory processes. Topical application of diclofenac is thought to produce a local effect, with minimal systemic absorption. An open-label trial randomised 190 patients with localised inflammations, including peri- arthropathies (n=100), epicondylitis or styloiditis (n=41) and tendonitis or bursitis (n=59), to fourteen days’ treatment with a diclofenac 1% patch twice daily or 2g of diclofenac 1% gel four times daily. All patients completed the study and their data were included in chi-squared analyses of pain. Mean spontaneous pain (assessed via 10cm visual analogue scale (VAS) and via 4-point categorical scale) and pain on pressure (assessed via 4-point categorical scale) were significantly improved from baseline at fourteen days and the improvements were significantly greater with the patch compared to the gel. These results are summarised in the table below. Investigators’ and patients’ assessments of efficacy significantly favoured the patch compared to the gel. Good or excellent ratings of efficacy were assigned to the patch by 85% and 82% of the investigators and patients, respectively, compared to 44% and 22% for the gel. Mean pain scores in patients with localised inflammations, including epicondylitis, styloiditis, peri-arthropathies, tendonitis and bursitis. Diclofenac 1% patch Diclofenac 1% gel Day 0 Day 7 Day 14 Day 0 Day 7 Day 14 Mean spontaneous pain (0-10)a 7.9 3.8 3.1*+ 7.6 4.7 4.5* Mean spontaneous pain (0-3)b 2.36 1.17 0.99*+ 2.2 1.4 1.33* Pain on pressure (0-3) b 2.6 1.3 1.1**+ 2.4 1.6 1.5* a = 10cm visual analogue scale; b = 4-point categorical scale; * p<0.001 versus baseline; ** p<0.01 versus baseline; + p<0.001 change from baseline to day 14 versus change from baseline to day 14 with diclofenac 1% gel The active comparator study described previously included many patients with conditions which are not included in the licensed indications of diclofenac 1% gel patch. Two double- blind, randomised, placebo-controlled studies have recruited patients with conditions which could be treated with this preparation and these are described below. A study included 140 patients with acute, mild, post-traumatic ankle sprain, located at the external lateral (lateral collateral) ligament, originating less than 48 hours previously who had pain ³50mm on a 100mm VAS. Diclofenac 1% gel patch applied once daily for seven days, compared with placebo, was associated with significantly lower mean spontaneous pain scores (assessed via 100mm VAS), the primary outcome, at three, four and five hours and three and seven days after initiation of treatment. Assessments of pain at rest, on stretching, in response to pressure and when standing on one leg (assessed via 4-point categorical scales) were also significantly improved with the patch compared to placebo. Patients’ and investigators’ global assessments of efficacy significantly favoured the patch. Consumption of paracetamol was permitted if required during this study and was low in both groups, with no significant difference between them. A study included 85 adults with humero-radial epicondylitis and tendon pain. Degree of pain was not specified as an inclusion criterion. However, 90% and 71% of patients in the placebo and active treatment groups, respectively, presented with spontaneous pain described on a 5- 3 point categorical scale as moderate, severe or very severe. Diclofenac 1% gel patch applied twice daily for 14 days was associated with significant improvements in spontaneous pain score (assessed via 100mm VAS) at days seven, fourteen and twenty-eight (at 14-day post- treatment follow-up) compared to baseline. Placebo was also associated with significant improvements compared with baseline at days fourteen and twenty-eight. Data were not available for the significance of the differences between active treatment and placebo at day seven, fourteen or twenty-eight. However, an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) treatment by time interaction test found a significant difference between the groups over the whole study period. There was no significant difference between diclofenac 1% gel patch and placebo for mean spontaneous pain score (assessed via 5-point categorical scale) at day seven but this was significantly improved with the patch compared to placebo at day fourteen and twenty- eight. Patients’ global assessment of efficacy (assessed via 5-point categorical scale) significantly favoured the patch at day twenty-eight but was not significant at day fourteen. Investigators’ global assessment of efficacy (assessed via 5-point categorical scale) significantly favoured the patch at day fourteen but was not significant at day twenty-eight. Summary of evidence on comparative safety Common adverse effects associated with diclofenac 1% patch include local skin reactions, such as rash, pruritus and erythema. In the comparative trial described previously, which included 190 patients, five mild skin reactions were reported, with no significant difference in incidence between the patch and gel formulations. Summary of clinical effectiveness issues The comparison of diclofenac patch and gel formulations described previously included patients with a variety of localised inflammatory conditions, with many patients having a condition not included in the licensed indications for diclofenac 1% gel patches. This trial was not blinded to treatment allocation. This may have biased subjective assessments, such as pain and efficacy, especially if patients expected to achieve better pain relief with the novel patch formulation. In practice, it is possible that there may be no clinically significant difference between the formulations in the treatment of epicondylitis or ankle sprains. In the placebo-comparison in patients with epicondylitis there appears to be a difference in baseline pain severity, with more patients in the placebo group having moderate to very severe pain: 90% vs. 71%. This may have confounded assessments of treatment effect. The placebo-comparison in patients with epicondylitis did not report significant improvement with the patch compared to placebo in spontaneous pain on VAS and categorical scale at the seven-day time point and on VAS at day fourteen. However, as the report of this study did not define a primary endpoint and did not provide details about the power of the study, it is not possible to confirm that it had sufficient power to detect a significant difference between the patch and placebo at these time points. Summary of comparative health economic evidence The manufacturer submitted a cost minimisation study comparing diclofenac 1% gel patch with the gel equivalent. The purchase costs are: Gel patch: 1x 10 patches- £14.09 (2 x 5 patches in each sealed pouch) Comparator Diclofenac Emulgel: 1 x 100g tube - £7.00 4 Ankle sprain The submission assumed typically 1 patch would be applied per day for 3 days at a cost of £7.05; compared to 2-4g of gel, applied 3-4 times daily for typically 14 days, at a cost of £14.00–£21.00. Epicondylitis The submission assumed typically 1 patch would be applied twice daily for 7 days, with a maximum duration of 14 days. Cost for typical treatment duration of £21.15 and £42.30 for maximum duration.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Diclofenac Topical Patch Gel Solution Monograph
    Diclofenac Topical Patch, Gel and Solution National Drug Monograph March 2016 VHA Pharmacy Benefits Management Services, Medical Advisory Panel, and VISN Pharmacist Executives The purpose of VA PBM Services drug monographs is to provide a focused drug review for making formulary decisions. Updates will be made when new clinical data warrant additional formulary discussion. Documents will be placed in the Archive section when the information is deemed to be no longer current. FDA Approval Information Description/Mechanism of Action Diclofenac is the only nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) approved in the U.S. for topical application. The mechanism of diclofenac is believed to be inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis, primarily by nonselectively inhibiting cyclooxygenase. The agents covered in this review are the four diclofenac topical products approved for analgesic purposes: Diclofenac epolamine / hydroxyethylpyrrolidine patch (DEHP) 1.3% approved in January 2007 Diclofenac sodium topical gel 1%, approved in October 2007 Diclofenac sodium topical solution 1.5% with dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO, 45.5% w/w), approved in November 2009 Diclofenac sodium topical solution 2% with dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO, 45.5% w/w), approved in January 2014 Indication(s) Under Review in this document (may include off Solution 1.5% Solution 2% label) Patch 1.3% Gel 1% (Drops) (MDP) Topical treatment Relief of the pain of Treatment of signs Treatment of the Also see Table 1 Product Descriptions of acute pain due osteoarthritis of joints and symptoms of pain of below. to minor strains, amenable to topical osteoarthritis of the osteoarthritis of sprains, and treatment, such as the knee(s) the knee(s) contusions knees and those of the hands.
    [Show full text]
  • Ketoprofen 2.5% Gel: a Clinical Overview
    European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences 2011; 15: 943-949 Ketoprofen 2.5% gel: a clinical overview S. COACCIOLI Rheumatology Unit, Santa Maria General Hospital, Terni (Italy) Abstract. – Ketoprofen (KP), a non- therefore, with fewer serious adverse events steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), pos- (AEs)2. Current guidelines produced by the Euro- sesses analgesic, antipyretic and anti-inflamma- pean League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and tory properties. Oral KP is widely used in mus- culoskeletal pain and inflammation in muscles the Osteoarthritis Research Society International and joints, including arthritis pain, osteoarthritis, (OARSI) suggest that topical NSAIDs are pre- stiffness of the joints, soft tissue rheumatism, ferred over oral NSAIDs for patients with mild to and sports injuries. In common with all NSAIDs, moderate knee or hand OA with few affected oral KP has been associated with systemic ad- joints, and/or a history of sensitivity to oral verse events and in particular gastrointestinal NSAIDs3,4. The favourable benefit/risk ratio of disorders. Topical application of the active ingre- dient is locally effective and at the same time topical NSAIDs has been further confirmed by a minimises the risk of systemic adverse events. recent Cochrane meta-analysis of 47 randomized Pharmacokinetic studies show that serum levels studies5. Because there are a number of topical of the active ingredient following topical KP formulations of NSAIDs currently available, 2.5% gel are less than 1% of those reported after there is a need to summarize the evidence sup- oral dosing, thereby providing good levels of porting the effectiveness and safety of each for- pain relief without the systemic adverse events mulation.
    [Show full text]
  • Analgesic Efficacy and Safety of Transdermal and Oral Diclofenac in Postoperative Pain Management Following Dental Implant Placement
    Analgesic efficacy and safety of transdermal and oral diclofenac in postoperative pain management following dental implant placement Raja Rajeswari S., MDS ¢ Triveni M. Gowda, MDS ¢ Tarun A.B. Kumar, MDS ¢ Dhoom S. Mehta, MDS Kanchan Arya, MDS The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and ehabilitation of partially and completely edentulous safety of transdermal and oral routes of diclofenac for areas with dental implants is well established, with postoperative pain management in patients undergo- numerous advantages over conventional procedures. ing dental implant placement. Twenty systemically R A recent meta-analysis demonstrated a 95.2% survival rate and healthy, partially edentulous patients who required 84.9% success rate in single-crown–supported implants, signi- 1 dental implants bilaterally in the mandibular first molar fying the predictability of this treatment modality. The pain region were included. While the patient was under local following implant surgery is categorized generally as mild to anesthesia, an implant was placed in the mandibular moderate and generally is at its maximum level 5-6 hours post- 2 first molar region of one quadrant. After a minimum postoperatively. If appropriate surgical guidelines—including of 4 weeks, an implant was placed in the contralateral precise incision, gentle tissue handling, heat control with quadrant under local anesthesia. Patients were pre- copious irrigation during osteotomy preparation, intermittent scribed 50 mg of oral diclofenac, taken twice daily for 3 drilling pressure, and end-to-end closure of sutures—are fol- days, following implant placement on the first side and lowed prudently, postoperative pain can be mitigated consider- a 100-mg diclofenac transdermal patch, placed once ably.
    [Show full text]
  • Composition for Use in Treating and Preventing Inflammation Related Disorder
    (19) TZZ 54¥¥7A_T (11) EP 2 543 357 A1 (12) EUROPEAN PATENT APPLICATION (43) Date of publication: (51) Int Cl.: 09.01.2013 Bulletin 2013/02 A61K 9/00 (2006.01) A61K 47/36 (2006.01) (21) Application number: 11173000.8 (22) Date of filing: 07.07.2011 (84) Designated Contracting States: (72) Inventor: Lin, Shyh-Shyan AL AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB Taipei (TW) GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MC MK MT NL NO PL PT RO RS SE SI SK SM TR (74) Representative: Becker Kurig Straus Designated Extension States: Bavariastrasse 7 BA ME 80336 München (DE) (71) Applicant: Holy Stone Healthcare Co.,Ltd. Taipei City (TW) (54) Composition for use in treating and preventing inflammation related disorder (57) The presentinvention isrelated to ause fortreat- ease, coeliac disease, conjunctivitis, otitis, allergic rhin- ing and preventing inflammation related disorder of a itis, gingivitis, aphthous ulcer, bronchitis, gastroesopha- composition containing a drug and hyaluronic acid (HA) geal reflux disease (GERD), esophagitis, gastritis, en- or HA mixture, whereas the HA or the HA mixture as a teritis, peptic ulcer, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), delivery vehicle can be a formulation including at least Crohn’s Disease, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), intes- two HAs having different average molecular weights. The tinal inflammation or allergy, urethritis, cystitis, vaginitis, composition has been demonstrated to be capable of proctitis, eosinophilic gastroenteritis, or rheumatoid ar- reducing the therapeutic dose of a drug on the treatment thritis. and prevention of inflammation related disorders is acute inflammatory disease, chronic obstructed pulmonary dis- EP 2 543 357 A1 Printed by Jouve, 75001 PARIS (FR) 1 EP 2 543 357 A1 2 Description alleviate pain by counteracting the cyclooxygenase (COX) enzyme.
    [Show full text]
  • Inflammatory Drugs (Nsaids) for People with Or at Risk of COVID-19
    Evidence review Acute use of non-steroidal anti- inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for people with or at risk of COVID-19 Publication date: April 2020 This evidence review sets out the best available evidence on acute use of non- steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for people with or at risk of COVID-19. It should be read in conjunction with the evidence summary, which gives the key messages. Evidence review commissioned by NHS England Disclaimer The content of this evidence review was up-to-date on 24 March 2020. See summaries of product characteristics (SPCs), British national formulary (BNF) or the MHRA or NICE websites for up-to-date information. For details on the date the searches for evidence were conducted see the search strategy. Copyright © NICE 2020. All rights reserved. Subject to Notice of rights. ISBN: 978-1-4731-3763-9 Contents Contents ...................................................................................................... 1 Background ................................................................................................. 2 Intervention .................................................................................................. 2 Clinical problem ........................................................................................... 3 Objective ...................................................................................................... 3 Methodology ................................................................................................ 4 Summary of included studies
    [Show full text]
  • Innovations from 'Down-Under': a Focus on Prescription to Non-Prescription Medicine Reclassification in New Zealand and Australia
    ORIGINAL ARTICLE SelfCare 2012;3(5):88-107 Advancing the study&understanding of self-care INNOVATIONS FROM ‘DOWN-UNDER’: A FOCUS ON PRESCRIPTION TO NON-PRESCRIPTION MEDICINE RECLASSIFICATION IN NEW ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIA NATALIE GAULD*, FIONA KELLY**, LYNNE EMMERTON†, LINDA BRYANT††, STEPHEN BUETOW‡ * PhD Candidate, Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Auckland, New Zealand **Honorary Senior Lecturer, School of Pharmacy, University of Auckland, New Zealand †Associate Professor, School of Pharmacy, Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute, Perth, Western Australia †† Honorary Lecturer, Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Auckland, New Zealand ‡Associate Professor, Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Auckland, New Zealand ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Australia and New Zealand (NZ) contribute to the international trend of medicines reclassification from prescription to non-prescription availability (switch). Both countries have been acknowledged as being as advanced or even more so than the United Kingdom (UK) in availability of medicines without prescription, despite not making some of the recent innovative UK switches. OBJECTIVE: To derive a measure of progressiveness in switch; to compare the progressiveness of switch between NZ and Australia; and to compare NZ and Australia switch activity with the UK. METHODS: Records of medicines classification meetings in Australia and NZ from 2000 to 2011 were analysed with respect to all switch considerations (whether approved or not approved). Switches in Australia and NZ were compared with those in the UK. A new measure, ‘innovative switches’, was developed to provide a useful measure of switch progress. RESULTS: Australia demonstrated ‘switch innovation’ in the early 2000s, including the ‘first-in-world’ switch of orlistat, but has slowed down since.
    [Show full text]
  • A Thesis Entitled Design, Optimization and Evaluation of a Novel Emulgel
    A Thesis entitled Design, Optimization and Evaluation of a Novel Emulgel of Ibuprofen for Enhanced Skin Delivery using Formulating for Efficacy™ software by Aastha Chadha Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science Degree in Pharmaceutical Sciences Industrial Pharmacy ________________________________________ Gabriella Baki, Ph.D., Committee Chair ________________________________________ Caren L. Steinmiller, Ph.D., Committee Member ________________________________________ Jerry Nesamony, Ph.D., Committee Member ________________________________________ Dr. Amanda Bryant-Friedrich, Dean College of Graduate Studies The University of Toledo May, 2018 Copyright 2018, Aastha Chadha This document is copyrighted material. Under copyright law, no parts of this document may be reproduced without the expressed permission of the author. An Abstract of Design, Optimization and Evaluation of a Novel Emulgel of Ibuprofen using Formulating for Efficacy™ Software by Aastha Chadha Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science Degree in Pharmaceutical Sciences Industrial Pharmacy The University of Toledo May 2018 Development of novel formulations present unique challenges in selecting the optimum formulation type for a given active ingredient. The topical route has long been used for delivering drugs directly to the affected target site through the skin. Current approaches in design and optimization of topical formulations necessitate extensive decisions in choosing the right components for the formulation to achieve high safety, clinical efficacy, and patient compliance. It is a resource-intensive process, which involves a certain degree of hit-and-trial on the part of the formulator. Solubility of the active ingredient in the vehicle and the skin is an important parameter in selecting and optimizing vehicle components for topical formulation development.
    [Show full text]
  • WO 2013/020527 Al 14 February 2013 (14.02.2013) P O P C T
    (12) INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION PUBLISHED UNDER THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT) (19) World Intellectual Property Organization International Bureau (10) International Publication Number (43) International Publication Date WO 2013/020527 Al 14 February 2013 (14.02.2013) P O P C T (51) International Patent Classification: (74) Common Representative: UNIVERSITY OF VETER¬ A61K 9/06 (2006.01) A61K 47/32 (2006.01) INARY AND PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES A61K 9/14 (2006.01) A61K 47/38 (2006.01) BRNO FACULTY OF PHARMACY; University of A61K 47/10 (2006.01) A61K 9/00 (2006.01) Veterinary and Pharmaceutical Sciences Brno Faculty Of A61K 47/18 (2006.01) Pharmacy, Palackeho 1/3, CZ-61242 Brno (CZ). (21) International Application Number: (81) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every PCT/CZ20 12/000073 kind of national protection available): AE, AG, AL, AM, AO, AT, AU, AZ, BA, BB, BG, BH, BN, BR, BW, BY, (22) Date: International Filing BZ, CA, CH, CL, CN, CO, CR, CU, CZ, DE, DK, DM, 2 August 2012 (02.08.2012) DO, DZ, EC, EE, EG, ES, FI, GB, GD, GE, GH, GM, GT, (25) Filing Language: English HN, HR, HU, ID, IL, IN, IS, JP, KE, KG, KM, KN, KP, KR, KZ, LA, LC, LK, LR, LS, LT, LU, LY, MA, MD, (26) Publication Language: English ME, MG, MK, MN, MW, MX, MY, MZ, NA, NG, NI, (30) Priority Data: NO, NZ, OM, PE, PG, PH, PL, PT, QA, RO, RS, RU, RW, 201 1-495 11 August 201 1 ( 11.08.201 1) SC, SD, SE, SG, SK, SL, SM, ST, SV, SY, TH, TJ, TM, 2012- 72 1 February 2012 (01.02.2012) TN, TR, TT, TZ, UA, UG, US, UZ, VC, VN, ZA, ZM, 2012-5 11 26 July 2012 (26.07.2012) ZW.
    [Show full text]
  • (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2005/0249806A1 Proehl Et Al
    US 2005O249806A1 (19) United States (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2005/0249806A1 Proehl et al. (43) Pub. Date: Nov. 10, 2005 (54) COMBINATION OF PROTON PUMP Related U.S. Application Data INHIBITOR, BUFFERING AGENT, AND NONSTEROIDAL ANTI-NFLAMMATORY (60) Provisional application No. 60/543,636, filed on Feb. DRUG 10, 2004. (75) Inventors: Gerald T. Proehl, San Diego, CA (US); Publication Classification Kay Olmstead, San Diego, CA (US); Warren Hall, Del Mar, CA (US) (51) Int. Cl." ....................... A61K 9/48; A61K 31/4439; A61K 9/20 Correspondence Address: (52) U.S. Cl. ............................................ 424/464; 514/338 WILSON SONS IN GOODRICH & ROSAT (57) ABSTRACT 650 PAGE MILL ROAD Pharmaceutical compositions comprising a proton pump PALO ALTO, CA 94304-1050 (US) inhibitor, one or more buffering agent and a nonsteroidal ASSignee: Santarus, Inc. anti-inflammatory drug are described. Methods are (73) described for treating gastric acid related disorders and Appl. No.: 11/051,260 treating inflammatory disorders, using pharmaceutical com (21) positions comprising a proton pump inhibitor, a buffering (22) Filed: Feb. 4, 2005 agent, and a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. US 2005/0249806 A1 Nov. 10, 2005 COMBINATION OF PROTON PUMP INHIBITOR, of the Stomach by raising the Stomach pH. See, e.g., U.S. BUFFERING AGENT, AND NONSTEROIDAL Pat. Nos. 5,840,737; 6,489,346; and 6,645,998. ANTI-NFLAMMATORY DRUG 0007 Proton pump inhibitors are typically prescribed for Short-term treatment of active duodenal ulcers, gastrointes CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED tinal ulcers, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), Severe APPLICATIONS erosive esophagitis, poorly responsive Symptomatic GERD, 0001.
    [Show full text]
  • (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2012/0004305 A1 Miura Et Al
    US 201200.04305A1 (19) United States (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2012/0004305 A1 Miura et al. (43) Pub. Date: Jan. 5, 2012 (54) EXTERNAL PREPARATION CONTAINING Publication Classification ANALGESCAANTI-NFLAMMATORY AGENT (51) Int. Cl. A6II 3/196 (2006.01) (75) Inventors: Seiji Miura, Shizuoka (JP): A6IP 29/00 (2006.01) Makoto Kanebako, Shizuoka (JP) A6II 47/44 (2006.01) A6II 47/08 (2006.01) (73) Assignee: Kowa Co., Ltd., Nagoya-shi (JP) A6II 47/10 (2006.01) (52) U.S. Cl. ......................................... 514/567; 514/772 (21) Appl. No.: 13/256,024 (57) ABSTRACT (22) PCT Fled: Mar. 11, 2010 An external preparation containing the following compo nents (A), (B), (C), and (D): (86) PCT NO.: PCT/P10/01760 (A) a non-steroidal analgesic/anti-inflammatory agent, (B) a terpene and/or an essential oil containing a terpene, S371 (c)(1), (C) a higher alcohol, and (2), (4) Date: Sep. 12, 2011 (D) a polyoxyalkylene alkyl ether and/or a polyoxyalky lene alkenyl ether. The external preparation of the (30) Foreign Application Priority Data present invention has improved skin permeation, and can thus be effective at a low concentration, and also has Mar. 11, 2009 (JP) ................................. 2009-057972 excellent appearance. US 2012/0004305 A1 Jan. 5, 2012 EXTERNAL PREPARATION CONTAINING external application containing alkyl pyrrolidone, hydro ANALGESCAANTI-NFLAMMATORY AGENT philic polyether, hydrophilic nonionic Surfactants, water soluble polymer Substances having a carboxyl group, water TECHNICAL FIELD soluble vinyl polymers, water-insoluble multivalent metal salts, polyhydric alcohol, organic hydroxy acid, and water 0001. The present invention relates to an external prepa (see Patent Document 6), a piroXicam-containing transder ration containing a non-steroidal analgesic/anti-inflamma mal system containing, as an adhesive, a copolymer com tory agent.
    [Show full text]
  • Topical Nsaids for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain in Adults (Review)
    Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Topical NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults (Review) Derry S, Conaghan P, Da Silva JAP, Wiffen PJ, Moore RA Derry S, Conaghan P, Da Silva JAP, Wiffen PJ, Moore RA. Topical NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD007400. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007400.pub3. www.cochranelibrary.com Topical NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults (Review) Copyright © 2016 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. TABLE OF CONTENTS HEADER....................................... 1 ABSTRACT ...................................... 1 PLAINLANGUAGESUMMARY . 2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS FOR THE MAIN COMPARISON . ..... 4 BACKGROUND .................................... 6 OBJECTIVES ..................................... 7 METHODS ...................................... 7 RESULTS....................................... 10 Figure1. ..................................... 11 Figure2. ..................................... 14 Figure3. ..................................... 16 Figure4. ..................................... 17 Figure5. ..................................... 20 DISCUSSION ..................................... 22 Figure6. ..................................... 23 AUTHORS’CONCLUSIONS . 24 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . 25 REFERENCES ..................................... 26 CHARACTERISTICSOFSTUDIES . 31 DATAANDANALYSES. 73 Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 Topical diclofenac versus carrier, Outcome 1 Clinical success. 74 Analysis
    [Show full text]
  • Photoprotection Compositions Comprising Chelating Agents
    Europaisches Patentamt European Patent Office © Publication number: 0 496 433 A2 Office europeen des brevets EUROPEAN PATENT APPLICATION © Application number: 92106051.3 int. Ci.5; A61K 7/40, A61 K 7/42 @ Date of filing: 18.10.88 This application was filed on 08 - 04 - 1992 as a © Applicant: THE PROCTER & GAMBLE divisional application to the application COMPANY mentioned under INID code 60. One Procter & Gamble Plaza Cincinnati Ohio 45202(US) © Priority: 22.10.87 US 112576 04.10.88 US 251910 @ Inventor: Bissett, Donald Lynn 3925 Dust Commander Drive @ Date of publication of application: Hamilton, Ohio 45011 (US) 29.07.92 Bulletin 92/31 Inventor: Bush, Rodney Dean 1778 Clayburn Circle © Publication number of the earlier application in Cincinnati, Ohio 45240(US) accordance with Art.76 EPC: 0 313 305 Inventor: Chatterjee, Ranjit 5907 Gilmore Drive © Designated Contracting States: Fairfield, Ohio 4501 4(US) AT BE CH DE FR GB IT LI LU NL SE © Representative: Brooks, Maxim Courtney et al Procter & Gamble (NTC) Limited Whitley Road Longbenton Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE12 9TS(GB) © Photoprotection compositions comprising chelating agents. © The present invention involves photoprotective compositions which are useful for topical application to prevent damage to skin caused by acute or chronic exposure to ultraviolet light comprising chelating agents. Also involved are compositions comprising chelating agents together with anti-inflammatory agents, sun- screening agents, and/or radical scavenging agents. Methods for using such compositions to prevent damage to skin caused by acute or chronic exposure to ultraviolet light are also involved. CM < CO CO CO Oi Rank Xerox (UK) Business Services EP 0 496 433 A2 TECHNICAL FIELD This invention relates to topical compositions useful for protecting the skin from the harmful effects of ultraviolet irradiation, such as sunburn and sun-induced premature aging of the skin.
    [Show full text]