Therapeutic effects of alendronate 35 mg once weekly and 5 mg once daily in Japanese patients with osteoporosis: a double-blind, randomized study

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 382-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinji Uchida ◽  
Tadaaki Taniguchi ◽  
Takafumi Shimizu ◽  
Taro Kakikawa ◽  
Kotoba Okuyama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Study ◽  
Japanese Patients ◽  
Therapeutic Effects ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily

Efficacy of Celecoxib in Treating Symptoms of Viral Pharyngitis: A Double-Blind, Randomized Study of Celecoxib versus Diclofenac

2002 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
LLM Weckx ◽  
JE Ruiz ◽  
J Duperly ◽  
GA Martínez Mendizabal ◽  
MBG Rausis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Specific Inhibitor ◽  
Symptomatic Treatment ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Daily Group ◽  
Throat Pain

This study compared the efficacy and safety of the cyclooxygenase-2 specific inhibitor celecoxib with the conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug diclofenac in the symptomatic treatment of viral pharyngitis. Adult patients from 27 study centers in Latin America were treated with oral doses of celecoxib 200 mg once daily or 200 mg twice daily, or diclofenac 75 mg twice daily for 5 days in a double-blind, randomized study. The primary efficacy assessment was ‘Throat Pain on Swallowing’ on day 3. In addition, secondary quality-of-life assessments were performed on days 3 and 5. All adverse events and treatment-emergent signs and symptoms were recorded. Data from 313 patients were evaluable for efficacy (105 celecoxib 200 mg once daily, 107 celecoxib 200 mg twice daily, 101 diclofenac 75 mg twice daily). The upper 95% confidence limits for the visual analog scale of ‘Throat Pain on Swallowing’ on day 3 for celecoxib 200 mg once daily relative to diclofenac 75 mg twice daily, and celecoxib 200 mg twice daily relative to diclofenac 75 mg twice daily were 9.26 and 7.83, respectively. All secondary efficacy and quality-of-life measures were clinically similar for the three treatment groups, and no statistically significant differences were detected. The incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events were similar for all groups, but numerically higher among patients taking diclofenac than celecoxib. More patients in the diclofenac group reported gastrointestinal complaints (7.3%) compared with those in the celecoxib groups (4.3% in the celecoxib 200 mg once-daily group and 3.4% in the celecoxib 200 mg twice-daily group). In conclusion, 5 days of treatment with celecoxib 200 mg once daily is as effective as diclofenac 75 mg twice daily in the symptomatic treatment of viral pharyngitis. Celecoxib 200 mg once daily is also as effective as celecoxib 200 mg twice daily in this condition.

Nadolol and Propranolol in the Treatment of Hypertension: A Double-Blind Comparison

1980 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 193-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
M M El Mehairy ◽  
MB Cairo ◽  
A Shaker ◽  
M Ramadan ◽  
S Hamza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Reactions ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Depressant Action ◽  
Daily Dose ◽  
Treatment Of Hypertension ◽  
Blind Comparison ◽  
Supine Systolic Blood Pressure

Nadolol and propranolol were compared in seventy-five hypertensive patients in a double-blind randomized study conducted at Ain-Shams Hospital. After an initial wash-out period of 5 weeks, including 3 weeks of placebo administration, forty-five patients were given nadolol once daily and thirty patients received propranolol four times per day for 12 weeks, followed by a tapering-off period of 2 weeks. Both beta-blocking agents were effective in controlling hypertension with final daily doses ranging from 80 to 320 mg. Of statistical significance, however, were the better responses of supine systolic blood pressure elicited by nadolol. The only adverse reactions that occurred in this series were slight weight gains in two patients treated with nadolol and moderate dizziness in one patient treated with propranolol. Nadolol was proved to be a safe antihypertensive drug, at least comparable to propranolol in efficacy, with the advantages of a once-daily dose and a lack of direct depressant action on the heart.

Eprosartan in the Primary Prevention of Cardiac Allograft Vascular Disease: A Double-Blind Prospectively Randomized Study using Intravascular Ultrasound

2008 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 1022-1031 ◽  
Author(s):  
K Pethig ◽  
B Hornig ◽  
C Bara ◽  
B Schieffer ◽  
A Haverich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Study ◽  
Cardiac Allograft ◽  
Post Transplantation ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Transplant Patients ◽  
Flow Reserve ◽  
Vessel Volume ◽  
Preventive Role

The angiotensin blocker (ARB) eprosartan (600 mg once daily) and the calcium antagonist diltiazem (90 mg twice daily) were studied in a 24-month prospective, randomized, double-blind trial involving 53 heart transplant patients. The study compared their effects on the development of post-transplant cardiac allograft vasculopathy, a condition that frequently impairs long-term post-transplantation survival and where angiotensin blockers might be expected to play a preventive role. From baseline to month 12, the mean plaque volume increased by 7.7 mm3 for eprosartan-treated patients and by 34.4 mm3 for diltiazem-treated patients, but the eprosartan-related trend for reduced myointimal hyperplasia was not statistically significant. The trend in favour of eprosartan for secondary parameters (mean intimal index, vessel volume, lumen volume and coronary flow reserve) also failed to reach significance. The lack of effect might be due to a lower than planned sample size and observation periods due to recruitment difficulties. A larger study is required to confirm these preliminary findings.

scholarly journals Once-Daily Oral Gatifloxacin versus Oral Levofloxacin in Treatment of Uncomplicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infections: Double-Blind, Multicenter, Randomized Study

2001 ◽  
Vol 45 (8) ◽  
pp. 2358-2362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary A. Tarshis ◽  
Barry M. Miskin ◽  
Terry M. Jones ◽  
John Champlin ◽  
Kevin J. Wingert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Common Adverse Event ◽  
Soft Tissue Infections ◽  
Bacterial Eradication ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
End Of Treatment ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Cure Rates

ABSTRACT This was a double-blind, multicenter study in which 410 adults (≥18 years of age) with uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) were randomized to receive either 400 mg of gatifloxacin orally once daily or 500 mg of levofloxacin orally once daily for 7 to 10 days. The study protocol called for four assessments—before and during treatment, at the end of treatment, and posttreatment. Efficacy evaluations included clinical response and bacterial eradication rates. Of 407 treated patients, 202 (108 women, 94 men) received gatifloxacin and 205 (111 women, 94 men) received levofloxacin. For clinically evaluable patients, the cure rates were 91% for gatifloxacin and 84% for levofloxacin (95% confidence interval [CI] for the difference, −2.0 to 15.2%). Clinical cure rates for microbiologically evaluable patients were 93% for gatifloxacin and 88% for levofloxacin (95% CI for the difference, −6.5 to 16.8%). The bacterial eradication rate was 92% for each group, with gatifloxacin eradicating 93% of the methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus isolates and levofloxacin eradicating 91% of them. Both drugs were well tolerated. Most of the adverse events were mild to moderate, and nausea was the most common adverse event in each treatment arm. Once-daily oral gatifloxacin (400 mg) is clinically efficacious and well tolerated compared with once-daily levofloxacin (500 mg) for the treatment of patients with uncomplicated SSTIs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document