Potentially inappropriate concomitant medicine use with the selective COX-2 inhibitor celecoxib: Analysis and comparison of spontaneous adverse event reports from Australia, Canada and the USA.

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 153-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Youanna Baselyous ◽  
Michael De Cocinis ◽  
Mohammed Ibrahim ◽  
Alisa Kalra ◽  
Rachel Yacoub ◽  
...  
Drug Safety ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (12) ◽  
pp. 1029-1035 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cameron J. McDonald ◽  
Lisa M. Kalisch Ellett ◽  
John D. Barratt ◽  
Gillian E. Caughey

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 399-405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cameron J. McDonald ◽  
Lisa M. Kalisch Ellett ◽  
John D. Barratt ◽  
Gillian E. Caughey

2019 ◽  
Vol 77 ◽  
pp. 36-42
Author(s):  
Ana Rangel-Nava ◽  
José Manuel Ramírez-Uribe ◽  
Sergio Recillas-Morales ◽  
José Antonio Ibancovichi-Camarillo ◽  
Arturo Venebra-Muñoz ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 39-47
Author(s):  
Sarah Yenser Wood ◽  
Joanne C Ryan ◽  
Andrew G Clair ◽  
Daniel J George

Until recently, the sole treatment for patients with nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) was nephrectomy followed by observation. As metastatic RCC (mRCC) remains largely incurable (5-year survival rate ∼12%), adjuvant treatment, with potential to prevent/delay disease recurrence, is needed. In November 2017, sunitinib was approved in the USA as the first adjuvant therapy for patients at high risk for recurrent RCC postnephrectomy based on results from the S-TRAC trial. Patients eligible for adjuvant treatment have no evidence of disease and may be less willing to tolerate side effects. Therefore, proactive adverse event management is critical for keeping patients on adjuvant treatment and requires understanding the subtle differences in the adverse event profile of sunitinib in the adjuvant versus metastatic RCC setting.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (02) ◽  
pp. 223-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmen K. Wong ◽  
Nathaniel S. Marshall ◽  
Ronald R. Grunstein ◽  
Samuel S. Ho ◽  
Romano A. Fois ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 461-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Ann Marrie ◽  
Olympia Hadjimichael ◽  
Timothy Vollmer

Objective: To determine the frequency of alternative medicine use among multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, and the factors which predict such use. Methods: We examined 20778 MS patients enrolled in the North A merican Research C onsortium on Multiple Sclerosis (NARC O MS) Patient Registry, residing in the USA. We used demographic and clinical data to create multivariate logistic regression models for i) lifetime use of any alternative medicine, ii) lifetime use of any alternative provider (A P), and iii) lifetime use of each of the three most common A P. Results: 20387 patients provided data regarding alternative medicine use. Lifetime use of any alternative medicine was 54% and current use was 30%. C hiropractors (51%), massage therapists (34%), and nutritionists (24%) were the most commonly used A P. In all five models, use of alternative medicine was most strongly predicted by use of a conventional provider, and more modestly by disease factors indicating more severe or prolonged disease. Predictive power of the models was poor (c-index =0.62-0.68), despite good fits for the data. Conclusions: Demographic factors play only a minimal role in predicting the use of alternative medicine in this MS population while disease factors play a slightly stronger role. There must be other factors involved that may include accessibility, social acceptability and cultural factors. G iven the frequency of alternative medicine use by this patient population, further characterization of these factors is important.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document