DOCSLIB.ORG

Association of Systemic Medication Use with Intraocular Pressure in a Multiethnic Asian Population: the Singapore Epidemiology of Eye Diseases Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Association of Systemic Medication Use with Intraocular Pressure in a Multiethnic Asian Population: the Singapore Epidemiology of Eye Diseases Study Supplementary Online Content Ho H, Shi Y, Chua J, et al. Association of systemic medication use with intraocular pressure in a multiethnic Asian population: the Singapore Epidemiology of Eye Diseases Study. JAMA Ophthalmol. Published online January 12, 2017. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.5318 eAppendix. Drugs According to Medication Class eTable 1. Subgroup Analysis According to Systemic Medical Condition eTable 2. Multivariable Linear Regression Models for Interactions Between Medication Classes This supplementary material has been provided by the authors to give readers additional information about their work. © 2017 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 09/24/2021 eAppendix. Drugs According to Medication Class The following list was used to identify the lists of drug names each participant was taking, classified according to medication class. ACE inhibitors Captopril, Coversyl, Enalapril, Glioten, Imidapril, Invoril, Lisinopril, Lisoril, Perindopril, Tanapril, Tanatril, Zestril Alpha-Glucosidase Inhibitors Acarbose, Glucobay Analgaesics Acugesic, Anarex, Codeine, Ibuprofen, Ketoprofen, Pacofen, Panadol, Panadeine, Paracetamol, Norgesic, Suniton, Tramadol Angiotensin Receptor Blockers Atacand, Candesartan, Coaprovel, Cozaar, Co-Diovan, Diovan, Exforge, Hyzaar, Irbesartan, Losartan, Micardis, Olmetec, Omelsartan, Telmisartan, Valsartan Anti-coagulants/Anti-platelets Clopidogrel, Dipyridamole, Perazodin, Plavix, Ticlid, Ticlopidine, Warfarin Anti-Depressants Amitriptyline, Deanxit, Depranil, Escitalopram, Fluvoxamine, Fluoxetine, Imipramine, Lexapro, Melitracen, Mirtazapine, Paroxetine, Prozac, Seroxat Anti-Histamines Adezio, Cetirizine, Chlorphenamine, Cinnarizine, Cyproheptadine, Hydroxyzine, Loratadine, Pilian, Piriton, Telfast, Xyzal, Zyrtec Aspirin Aspirin, Cardiprin Beta-blockers Atenolol, Betaloc, Beta-nicardia, Bisoprolol, Carvediol, Dilatrend, Hypernol, Inderal, Metoprolol, Nebivolol, Propranolol, Sotalol, Tenormin © 2017 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 09/24/2021 Biguanides Diabetmin, Glucophage, Metforal, Metformin Calcium Channel Blockers Adalat, Amlodipine, Bepridil, Diltiazem, Felodipine, Lacidipine, Nifedipine, Nifetex, Nif- ten, Norvasc, Plendil, Stamlo, Vascor, Verapamil Diuretics Amiloride, Chlorthiazide, Frusemide, Furosemide, Hydrochlorothiazide, Indapamide, Lasix, Moduretic, Natrilix, Spironolactone Fibrates Ciprofibrate, Fenofibrate, Gemfibrozil, Modalim, Recozil, Trolip H2 Receptor Antagonist Aciloc, Apo-ranitidine, Cimetidine, Famotidine, Ranitidine, Zantac, Insulin Actrapid, Aspart, Insulatard, Insulin, Lantus, Mixtard, NovoMix Nitrates Angsobide, Glyceryl Trinitrate, Gtn, Imdur, Isosorbide Mononitrate, Isosorbide Dinitrate, Iwdex NSAIDS Almiral, Arcoxia, Cataflam, Celecoxib, Diclofenac, Etoricoxib, Indocid, Indomethacin, Naproxen, Piroxicam, Rosiden, Sunprox, Voren Proton Pump Inhibitors Esomeprazole, Nexium, Omeprazole, Omezole, Rabeprazole Statins Apo-Lovastatin, Atorvastatin, Crestor, Lipitor, Lovastatin, Pravastatin, Rosuvastatin, Simtin, Simvastatin, Vytorin, Zocor Steroid Inhalers Beclomethasone, Betamethasone, Budesonide, Flixonase, Fluticasone, Mometasone, Nasonex, Seretide Sulphonylureas Amaryl, Daonil, Diamicron, Glibenclamide, Gliclazide, Glimepiride, Glipizide, Glucovance. Glyburide, Nateglinide, Starlix, Tolbutamide Thyroid Hormones Euthyrox, Levothyroxine, Thyroxine © 2017 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 09/24/2021 eTable 1. Subgroup Analysis According to Systemic Medical Condition Participants with Participants with Participants with Hypertension Diabetes Hyperlipidaemia Medication Class β (SE) p-value β (SE) p-value β (SE) p-value ACE inhibitors 0.52 (0.13) <0.001 - - - - ARB 0.43 (0.19) 0.025 - - - - Beta blockers -0.41 (0.11) <0.001 - - - - Sulphonylureas - - 0.33 (0.14) 0.014 - - Biguanides - - 0.16 (0.13) 0.232 - - Statins - - - - 0.29 (0.15) 0.054 SE: standard error; BMI: body mass index; HbA1c: glycosylated hemoglobin; BP: blood pressure; ACE: angiotensin converting enzyme; ARB: angiotensin receptor blockers. Model adjusted for concurrent use of other medications, in addition to age, gender, BMI, ethnicity and specific health conditions. © 2017 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 09/24/2021 eTable 2. Multivariable Linear Regression Models for Interactions Between Medication Classes No adjustments Adjusted for ACE-I use Adjusted for β-Blocker use β SE p-value β SE p-value β SE p-value ACE-I 0.34 0.23 0.14 - - - - - - β-Blockers -0.47 0.14 <0.001 0.32 0.27 0.22 - - - Statins 0.39 0.13 0.003 -0.21 0.25 0.41 -0.12 0.21 0.56 Biguanides 0.38 0.21 0.08 -0.15 0.30 0.61 -0.20 0.32 0.53 Sulfonylureas 0.74 0.30 0.014 0.26 0.32 0.43 0.04 0.33 0.89 Adjusted for Statin use Adjusted for Biguanide use Models were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, β SE p-value β SE p-value glycosylated hemoglobin levels and blood pressure. ACE-I - - - - - - Abbreviation: SE, standard β-Blockers - - - - - - error of mean Statins - - - - - - Biguanides 0.22 0.28 0.44 - - - Sulfonylureas -0.48 0.30 0.11 -0.28 0.30 0.36 © 2017 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 09/24/2021.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • S Values in Accordance with Soczewiński-Wachtmeisters Equation
    S values in accordance with Soczewiński-Wachtmeisters equation S value from Antiparasitic drugs: Soczewiński’s Metronidazole Ornidazole Secnidazole Tinidazole Equation* S(m) 1.614 2.161 1.921 1.911 S(a) 1.634 2.159 1.887 1.923 S value from Antihypertensive drugs: Soczewiński’s Nilvadipine Felodipine Isradipine Lacidipine equation 4.129 4.597 3.741 5.349 S(m) S(a) 5.330 4.841 4.715 5.690 S value from Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs): Soczewiński’s Mefenamic Indomethacin Nabumetone Phenylbutazone Carprofen Ketoprofen Flurbiprofen equation acid 2.879 2.773 3.456 2.682 2.854 2.139 2.568 S(m) 3.317 3.442 3.910 2.404 3.394 1.968 2.010 S(a) *where: S(m) – S is the slope of the regression curie in accordance with Soczewiński-Wachtmeisters equation using methanol-water mobile phase S(a) – S is the slope of the regression curie in accordance with Soczewiński-Wachtmeisters equation using acetone-water mobile phase First group of drugs (antiparasitic drugs) 1. Metronidazole (2-Methyl-5-nitroimidazole-1-ethanol) 2. Ornidazole (1-(3-Chloro-2-hydroxypropyl)-2-methyl-5-nitroimidazole) 3. Secnidazole (1-(2-methyl-5-nitro-1H-imidazol-1-yl) propan-2ol, 1-(2Hydroxypropyl)-2-methyl-5- nitroimidazole) 4. Tinidazole (1-[2-(Ethylsulfonyl)ethyl]-2-methyl-5-nitroimidazole) Second group of drugs (antihypertensive drugs) 1. Nilvadipine (2-Cyano-1,4-dihydro-6-methyl-4-(3-nitrophenyl)-3,5-pyridinedicarboxylic acid 3- methyl 5-(1-methylethyl) ester, 5-Isopropyl-3-methyl-2-cyano-1,4-dihydro-6-methyl-4-(m- nitrophenyl)-3,5-pyridinedicarboxylate, FK-235, FR-34235, Isopropyl 6-cyano-5-methoxycarbonyl-2- methyl-4-(3-nitrophenyl)-1,4-dihydropyridine-3-carboxylate) 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Lacidipine and Nifedipine GITS on Platelet Function in Patients with Essential Hypertension
    Journal of Human Hypertension (2000) 14, Suppl 1, S91–S95 2000 Macmillan Publishers Ltd All rights reserved 0950-9240/00 $15.00 www.nature.com/jhh Effect of lacidipine and nifedipine GITS on platelet function in patients with essential hypertension MC Armas-Padilla1, MJ Armas-Herna´ndez1, R Herna´ndez-Herna´ndez1, M Velasco2, B Pacheco1, AR Carvajal1 and A Castillo-Moreno1 1Clinical Pharmacology Unit, School of Medicine, Universidad Centroccidental Lisandro Alvarado, Barquisimeto, Venezuela; 2Clinical Pharmacology Unit, Vargas Medical School, Central University of Venezuela, Caracas, Venezuela With the aim of evaluating the effects on blood pressure, Both drugs reduced systolic and diastolic blood press- platelet function and insulin sensitivity of the dihydro- ure at the same level, however there were observable piridines lacidipine and nifedipine GITS, a parallel dou- differences in the rate of reduction. The nifedipine GITS ble-blind study was carried out in a group of 20 patients reduced supine systolic blood pressure by 25 mm Hg in with mild to moderate essential hypertension. They the first week, while the lacidipine did so by 11 mm Hg. received a placebo for 4 weeks; then were divided at At the end of the study period nifedipine reduced supine random into two groups of 10 patients each. Nifedipine systolic blood pressure by 28 mm Hg and lacidipine by GITS, 30 mg and lacidipine, 4 mg, were given during 16 20 mm Hg. Heart rate was increased slightly but signifi- weeks of active treatment. Blood pressure and heart cantly in the nifedipine GITS group only in the standing rate were measured at the clinic in supine, sitting and position.
    [Show full text]
  • Dorset Medicines Advisory Group
    DORSET CARDIOLOGY WORKING GROUP GUIDELINE FOR CALCIUM CHANNEL BLOCKERS IN HYPERTENSION SUMMARY The pan-Dorset cardiology working group continues to recommend the use of amlodipine (a third generation dihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker) as first choice calcium channel blocker on the pan-Dorset formulary for hypertension. Lercanidipine is second choice, lacidipine third choice and felodipine is fourth choice. This is due to preferable side effect profiles in terms of ankle oedema and relative costs of the preparations. Note: where angina is the primary indication or is a co-morbidity prescribers must check against the specific product characteristics (SPC) for an individual drug to confirm this is a licensed indication. N.B. Lacidipine and lercandipine are only licensed for use in hypertension. Chapter 02.06.02 CCBs section of the Formulary has undergone an evidence-based review. A comprehensive literature search was carried out on NHS Evidence, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Database, and UK Duets. This was for recent reviews or meta-analyses on calcium channel blockers from 2009 onwards (comparative efficacy and side effects) and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). REVIEW BACKGROUND Very little good quality evidence exists. No reviews, meta-analyses or RCTs were found covering all calcium channel blockers currently on the formulary. Another limitation was difficulty obtaining full text original papers for some of the references therefore having to use those from more obscure journals instead. Some discrepancies exist between classification of generations of dihydropyridine CCBs, depending upon the year of publication of the reference/authors’ interpretation. Dihydropyridine (DHP) CCBs tend to be more potent vasodilators than non-dihydropyridine (non-DHP) CCBs (diltiazem, verapamil), but the latter have greater inotropic effects.
    [Show full text]
  • A Different Dihydropyridine Calcium Channel Blocker in Hypertensive Patients Who Developed Pedal Edema on Dihydropyridine Calcium Channel Blocker Therapy
    Cumhuriyet Tıp Dergisi Cumhuriyet Tıp Derg 2014; 36: 19-24 Cumhuriyet Medical Journal Cumhuriyet Med J 2014; 36: 19-24 Original research-Orijinal araştırma http://dx.doi.org/10.7197/1305-0028.2102 A different dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker in hypertensive patients who developed pedal edema on dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker therapy Dihidropiridin grubu bir kalsiyum kanal blokeri tedavisi sırasında ayak bileği ödemi gelişen hipertansif hastalarda farklı bir dihidropiridin kalsiyum kanal blokerinin kullanımı Ayşe Yüksel, Ahmet Karagöz*, Özgül Uçar, Abdullah Çelik, Sinan Aydoğdu Department of Cardiology (A. Yüksel, MD), Abdurrahman Yurtaslan Oncology Education and Research Hospital, TR-06200 Ankara, Department of Cardiology (Assist Prof. A. Karagöz, MD), Giresun University, 28200, Giresun, Cardiovascular Surgery Clinic, (A. Çelik, MD), Giresun Professor Doctor Atilla İlhan Özdemir State Hospital, TR-28100 Giresun, Department of Cardiology (Assoc. Prof. Ö. Uçar, MD), Ankara Numune Education and Research Hospital, TR- 06230 Ankara, Department of Cardiology (Prof. S. Aydoğdu, MD), Yüksek İhtisas Education and Research Hospital, TR-06100 Ankara Abstract Aim. Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCB) are widely preferred for the treatment of hypertension for their efficacy, metabolic neutrality and low side effect profile. However pedal edema formation limits their usage. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the incidence of pedal edema formation with a different dihydropyridine CCB in hypertensive patients who developed pedal edema during a dihydropyridine CCB therapy. Method. Fifty-eight hypertensive patients (34 female, 24 male, mean age: 65.3±10.5) in whom pedal edema developed during treatment with a dihydropyridine CCB (amlodipine 10mg/day in 40 patients, amlodipine 5mg/day in 14 patients, nifedipine GITS 30mg/day in 4 patients) were enrolled.
    [Show full text]
  • Lercanidipine Vs Lacidipine in Isolated Systolic Hypertension
    Journal of Human Hypertension (2003) 17, 799–806 & 2003 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 0950-9240/03 $25.00 www.nature.com/jhh ORIGINAL ARTICLE Lercanidipine vs lacidipine in isolated systolic hypertension M Millar-Craig1, B Shaffu2, A Greenough3, L Mitchell3 and C McDonald3 1Department of Cardiology, Derbyshire Royal Infirmary, London Road, Derby, UK; 2Station Road Surgery, 152 Station Road, Wigston, Leicester, UK; 3Napp Pharmaceuticals Limited, Cambridge Science Park, Milton Road, Cambridge, UK This randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel blood pressure was À0.81 (À4.45, 2.84) mmHg. These group, multicentre study compared the efficacy and confidence intervals were within the limits specified for tolerability of lercanidipine with lacidipine. Elderly equivalence, that is, (À5, 5) mmHg. Ambulatory blood patients with isolated systolic hypertension (supine pressure monitoring showed that the antihypertensive blood pressure X160/o95 mmHg) were enrolled and effects of both drugs lasted for the full 24-h dosing underwent a placebo run-in period of 14–27 days before period and followed a circadian pattern. Both treatments random allocation to lercanidipine tablets 10 mg once were well tolerated with a low incidence of adverse drug daily (n ¼ 111) or lacidipine tablets 2 mg once daily reactions and a low withdrawal rate. Significantly fewer (n ¼ 111) for the assessment period (112–160 days). patients withdrew from treatment with lercanidipine Titration to lercanidipine 20 mg once daily (two 10 mg (P ¼ 0.015). Neither treatment had any clinically signifi- tablets) or lacidipine 4 mg once daily (two 2 mg tablets) cant effect on pulse rate or cardiac conduction.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Vital Essential and Necessary Drugs and Medical Sundries For
    LIST OF VITAL ESSENTIAL AND NECESSARY DRUGS AND 2015 MEDICAL SUNDRIES FOR PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTIONS Sixth Edition STANDARDS & REGULATION DIVISION JAMAICA List of Vital Essential and Necessary List of Drugs and Medical Sundries for Public Institutions List of Vital Essential and Necessary List of Drugs and Medical Sundries for Public Institutions CONTENTS CONTENTS Contd. Page Preface 5-6 Page Information on Hospitals and Health Centres 7 Explanatory Notes 8 Medical Sundries 69-73 Prescription Writing 9-10 Dental Supplies 74 Algorithm for Treatment of Hypertension 11-12 Radiotherapy – Diagnostic Agents 75 Algorithm for Management of Type 2 Diabetes 13-14 Raw Materials 76 List of Drugs Designated for NHF 15-17 List of Drugs Designated for JADEP 18 VOLUME11 – SPECIALIST LIST 77 VOLUME 1 – GENERAL LIST 19 CLASSIFICATION OF DRUGS SECTION 1. Cardiovascular System 78 CLASSIFICATION OF DRUGS SECTION 2. Central Nervous System 79 SECTION 1. Cardiovascular System 20-24 SECTION 3. Dermatology 80 SECTION 2. Central Nervous System 25-30 SECTION 4. Endocrine System 80 SECTION 3. Dermatology 31-33 SECTION 5. Gastro-intestinal System 81 SECTION 4. Ear, Nose and Oropharynx 34-35 SECTION 6. Infections 81 SECTION 5. Endocrine System 36-38 SECTION 7. Malignant Disease and SECTION 6. Gastro-intestinal System 39-40 Immunosuppression 82 SECTION 7. Infections 41-46 SECTION 8. Musculoskeletal and Joint Diseases 83 SECTION 8. Malignant Disease and SECTION 9. Ophthalmology 83 Immunosuppression 47-49 SECTION 10. Genito-Urinary Tract Disorders 84 SECTION 9. Musculoskeletal and Joint Diseases 50-51 SECTION 11. Respiratory System 84 SECTION 10. Nutrition and Blood 52-54 SECTION 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Paroxetine Shows No Effect on Drinking
    28 Addiction Psychiatry C LINICAL P SYCHIATRY N EWS • September 2007 Paroxetine Shows No E VIDENCE-BASED P SYCHIATRIC M EDICINE Effect on Drinking Abuse of Bupropion BY MICHELE G. SULLIVAN The patients’ average age was 29 The Problem caloric intake, or sleep. On self-rating scales, Mid-Atlantic Bureau years; 50% were male. At base- You work in one of America’s contemporary bupropion was perceived as an active drug only line, their mean score on the Lei- long-term psychiatric treatment centers, also as often as placebo. The investigators con- C HICAGO — Paroxetine can bowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) known as a state prison. Inmates who come to cluded, “It is unlikely that bupropion will give take the anxiety out of the drinker, was about 90, indicating severe so- outpatient appointments and complain of de- rise to [amphetaminelike] patterns of abuse but it cannot take the drinking out cial anxiety. Anxiety had its onset pressive symptoms frequently request bupro- among normals or among those predisposed of the anxious person. at age 12 years in these patients; pion (Wellbutrin). The history they provide is to psychostimulant abuse.” (The study came The drug did uncouple anxiety the use of alcohol to cope with speciously similar: “It’s the only antidepressant from the Baylor College of Medicine, the and drinking in patients who use symptoms followed about a that’s ever worked.” You start to inquire about Houston Veterans Administration Medical alcohol to cope with severe gener- decade later. They were moder- how this medication is used in the prison Center, and the Burroughs Wellcome Research alized social anxiety, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • A Drug Repositioning Approach Identifies Tricyclic Antidepressants As Inhibitors of Small Cell Lung Cancer and Other Neuroendocrine Tumors
    Published OnlineFirst September 26, 2013; DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-13-0183 RESEARCH ARTICLE A Drug Repositioning Approach Identifi es Tricyclic Antidepressants as Inhibitors of Small Cell Lung Cancer and Other Neuroendocrine Tumors Nadine S. Jahchan 1 , 2 , Joel T. Dudley 1 , Pawel K. Mazur 1 , 2 , Natasha Flores 1 , 2 , Dian Yang 1 , 2 , Alec Palmerton 1 , 2 , Anne-Flore Zmoos 1 , 2 , Dedeepya Vaka 1 , 2 , Kim Q.T. Tran 1 , 2 , Margaret Zhou 1 , 2 , Karolina Krasinska 3 , Jonathan W. Riess 4 , Joel W. Neal 5 , Purvesh Khatri 1 , 2 , Kwon S. Park 1 , 2 , Atul J. Butte 1 , 2 , and Julien Sage 1 , 2 Downloaded from cancerdiscovery.aacrjournals.org on September 29, 2021. © 2013 American Association for Cancer Research. Published OnlineFirst September 26, 2013; DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-13-0183 ABSTRACT Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive neuroendocrine subtype of lung cancer with high mortality. We used a systematic drug repositioning bioinformat- ics approach querying a large compendium of gene expression profi les to identify candidate U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–approved drugs to treat SCLC. We found that tricyclic antidepressants and related molecules potently induce apoptosis in both chemonaïve and chemoresistant SCLC cells in culture, in mouse and human SCLC tumors transplanted into immunocompromised mice, and in endog- enous tumors from a mouse model for human SCLC. The candidate drugs activate stress pathways and induce cell death in SCLC cells, at least in part by disrupting autocrine survival signals involving neurotransmitters and their G protein–coupled receptors. The candidate drugs inhibit the growth of other neuroendocrine tumors, including pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and Merkel cell carcinoma.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Electropharmacological Effects of Bepridil and Sotalol in Halothane-Anesthetized Dogs
    Circ J 2008; 72: 1003–1011 Comparison of Electropharmacological Effects of Bepridil and Sotalol in Halothane-Anesthetized Dogs Tomomichi Ishizaka, DVM*,**; Akira Takahara, PhD*; Hiroshi Iwasaki, MD*; Yoshitaka Mitsumori, MD*; Hiroaki Kise, MD*; Yuji Nakamura, MS*; Atsushi Sugiyama, MD*,** Background Bepridil is known to have a multiple ion channel-blocking property in the heart, which has been applied for the treatment of atrial fibrillation and drug-refractory ventricular tachyarrhythmias. In this study, the electro-pharmacological effects of bepridil were compared with those of dl-sotalol, a representative class III anti- arrhythmic drug, using the halothane-anesthetized canine model. Methods and Results Cardiovascular and electrophysiological variables were measured under the halothane anesthesia. Intravenous administration of bepridil (0.3mg/kg, n=4) delayed the intraventricular conduction and prolonged the ventricular effective refractory period, whereas dl-sotalol (0.3mg/kg, iv, n=4) inhibited atrioven- tricular conduction and prolonged the atrial and ventricular effective refractory period. The additional adminis- tration of 10 times the higher dose of bepridil or dl-sotalol (ie, 3mg/kg, iv, n=4 for each group) decreased blood pressure, suppressed ventricular contraction and sinus automaticity, and prolonged the atrial and ventricular effective refractory period and monophasic action potential duration, in addition to the effects of the low dose. Conclusions The electropharmacological effects of bepridil and dl-sotalol were similar,
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation and Management of Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection
    EVALUATION AND MANAGEMENT OF CHRONIC HEPATITIS C VIRUS (HCV) INFECTION Federal Bureau of Prisons Clinical Guidance MAY 2017 Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) Clinical Guidance is made available to the public for informational purposes only. The BOP does not warrant this guidance for any other purpose, and assumes no responsibility for any injury or damage resulting from the reliance thereof. Proper medical practice necessitates that all cases are evaluated on an individual basis and that treatment decisions are patient- specific. Consult the BOP Health Management Resources Web page to determine the date of the most recent update to this document: http://www.bop.gov/resources/health_care_mngmt.jsp. Federal Bureau of Prisons Evaluation and Management of Chronic HCV Infection Clinical Guidance May 2017 WHAT’S NEW IN BOP GUIDANCE REGARDING HCV INFECTION? The major changes included in this May 2017 update to the BOP guidance on chronic HCV infection are based primarily on the April 2017 changes to the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) guidelines, as follows: • The term resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) is now being used instead of resistance- associated variants (RAVs). • Anti-HBs and anti-HBc, in addition to HBsAg, are recommended for baseline testing of hepatitis B status (see LABORATORY TESTS under BASELINE EVALUATION). • Ledipasvir/sofosbuvir once daily for eight weeks is now an AASLD-recommended regimen for treatment in a subgroup of HCV-infected persons who have genotype 1a or 1b, have an HCV viral load <6 million IU/ml, and are treatment-naïve—but who are not black, are not HIV-coinfected, and do not have cirrhosis.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Article Antidepressant Treatment for Acute Bipolar Depression: an Update
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Crossref Hindawi Publishing Corporation Depression Research and Treatment Volume 2012, Article ID 684725, 10 pages doi:10.1155/2012/684725 Review Article Antidepressant Treatment for Acute Bipolar Depression: An Update Ben H. Amit1, 2 and Abraham Weizman1, 2 1 Geha Mental Health Center, Research Unit, P.O. Box 102, Petach Tikva 49100, Israel 2 Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, P.O. Box 39040, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel Correspondence should be addressed to Ben H. Amit, [email protected] Received 23 October 2011; Accepted 29 November 2011 Academic Editor: Po-See Chen Copyright © 2012 B. H. Amit and A. Weizman. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. While studies in the past have focused more on treatment of the manic phase of bipolar disorder (BD), recent findings demonstrate the depressive phase to be at least as debilitating. However, in contrast to unipolar depression, depression in bipolar patients exhibits a varying response to antidepressants, raising questions regarding their efficacy and tolerability. Methods.Weconducteda MEDLINE and Cochrane Collaboration Library search for papers published between 2005 and 2011 on the subject of antidepres- sant treatment of bipolar depression. Sixty-eight articles were included in the present review. Results. While a few studies did advo- cate the use of antidepressants, most well-controlled studies failed to show a robust effect of antidepressants in bipolar depression, regardless of antidepressant class or bipolar subtype.
    [Show full text]
  • Acute and Chronic Treatment with 5-HT Reuptake Inhibitors Differentially Modulate Emotional Responses in Anxiety Models in Rodents
    Psychopharmacology (1994) 113:463-470 Psychopharmacology © Springer-Verlag 1994 Acute and chronic treatment with 5-HT reuptake inhibitors differentially modulate emotional responses in anxiety models in rodents Guy GriebeP, Jean-Luc Moreau 2, Francois Jenck 2, Ren6 Misslin 1, James R. Martin z 1 Laboratoire de Psychophysiologie, 7 rue de l'Universit~, F-67000 Strasbourg, France 2 Pharma Division, Prectinical Research, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, CH-4002, Basel, Switzerland Received March 17, 1993 /FinaI version May 24, 1993 Abstract. This study investigated behavioural effects of 1992). However, several studies reported intriguing ob- very potent 5 HT reuptake inhibitors after acute treat- servations early in treatment (Saletu and Gfiinberger ment (cianopramine and citalopram), as well as after 1985; Gorman et al. 1987; Van Praag 1988 ;.Westenberg chronic treatment (cianopramine), in two behavioural and den Boer 1988; Humble et al. 1989; Giesecke 1990; models of anxiety: 1) the light/dark choice procedure in Montgomery 1991; Westenberg 1992). These authors mice and 2) the elevated plus-maze test in rats. In addi- noted activating effects at the beginning of treatment tion, the responses of mice to novelty in a free explora- with a 5-HT reuptake blocker, described as racing tion paradigm were assessed after acute administration thoughts, anxiety, nervousness, tremor, insomnia, jitteri- of both drugs. A single injection of cianopramine or ness, emotional discomfort and agitation; this effect dis- citalopram increased neophobic reactions in the free ex- appeared with subsequent treatment. It is hypothesized ploration test. Furthermore, these drugs increased the that the acute increased availability of 5-HT resulting avoidance reaction to a brightly illuminated chamber in from reuptake inhibition would initially produce an- the light/dark choice procedure as well as to open arms xiogenic-like effects until adaptive changes of the 5-HT in the elevated plus-maze test.
    [Show full text]