Which preparation of aspirin?

1978 ◽  
Vol 16 (13) ◽  
pp. 51-52

Aspirin is often used to treat complaints expected to be transient, such as toothache, headache and influenza. A rapid analgesic and sometimes anti-pyretic effect is required, and duration of treatment is likely to be short. Aspirin is often considered the first-choice drug for rheumatic disorders, particularly rheumatoid arthritis;1 here the circumstances are quite different because long-term treatment is required at the relatively high dosage necessary to obtain an anti-inflammatory effect.2

INDIAN DRUGS ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (07) ◽  
pp. 28-35
Author(s):  
T. K. Mohapatra ◽  
P Sarkar ◽  
R. N Dash ◽  
A. K Moharana ◽  
B. B. Subudhi

Aspirin (ASA) has been utilized against many inflammatory disorders. In recent years a growing body of research also suggests its efficacy against cancer. The use of ASA in these conditions requires long-term treatment. However, gastro-toxicity associated with ASA is a major challenge. Household species including turmeric, ginger, and cinnamon have enjoyed medicinal values including gastroprotective properties. Accordingly, their co-use with ASA may be beneficial in ensuring a safe long-term treatment. With this objective, the study was undertaken which revealed encouraging effects. A positive interaction was found with analgesic effect and anti-inflammatory effect of ASA. Further, these spices were shown to prevent gastro toxicity of ASA. In conclusion, ginger and turmeric can be used to complement the use of ASA against inflammatory disorders without the deleterious effects on stomach mucosa.


1974 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
pp. 338-346 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentin Stroescu ◽  
Carmen Georgescu ◽  
Radu Voiosu

In a double-blind, randomized trial on thirty-two patients affected by classical or definite rheumatoid arthritis, we have tried the effectiveness and safety of 500 mg/day oral diftalone versus 75 mg/day oral indomethacin for a period of six to twelve months treatment. Diftalone proved to be an effective and well tolerated anti-inflammatory drug in long-term treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Its activity and safety is at least comparable to that achieved by the use of indomethacin.


Ensho ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 597-605
Author(s):  
Sachiko Sugawara ◽  
Shoichiro Irimajiri ◽  
Torakichi Aoki ◽  
Shuichi Yokoyama ◽  
Sanae Ida ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 101 (04) ◽  
pp. 674-681 ◽  
Author(s):  
Massimo Franchini ◽  
Annarita Tagliaferri ◽  
Antonio Coppola

SummaryA four-decade clinical experience and recent evidence from randomised controlled studies definitively recognised primary prophylaxis, i.e. the regular infusion of factor concentrates started after the first haemarthrosis and/or before the age of two years, as the first-choice treatment in children with severe haemophilia. The available data clearly show that preventing bleeding since an early age enables to avoid or reduce the clinical impact of muscle-skeletal impairment from haemophilic arthropathy and the related consequences in psycho-social development and quality of life of these patients. In this respect, the aim of secondary prophylaxis, defined as regular long-term treatment started after the age of two years or after two or more joint bleeds, is to avoid (or delay) the progression of arthropathy. The clinical benefits of secondary prophylaxis have been less extensively studied, especially in adolescents and adults; also in the latter better outcomes and quality of life for earlier treatment have been reported. This review summarises evidence from literature and current clinical strategies for prophylactic treatment in patients with severe haemophilia, also focusing on challenges and open issues (optimal regimen and implementation, duration of treatment, long-term adherence and outcomes, cost-benefit ratios) in this setting.


2021 ◽  
Vol 79 (3) ◽  
pp. 229-232
Author(s):  
Ana Beatriz Ayroza Galvão Ribeiro GOMES ◽  
Milena Sales PITOMBEIRA ◽  
Douglas Kazutoshi SATO ◽  
Dagoberto CALLEGARO ◽  
Samira Luisa APÓSTOLOS-PEREIRA

ABSTRACT Background: Azathioprine is a common first-line therapy for neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). Objective: The aim of this study was to determine whether long-term treatment (>10 years) with azathioprine is safe in NMOSD. Methods: We conducted a retrospective medical record review of all patients at the School of Medicine of the University of São Paulo (São Paulo, Brazil) who fulfilled the 2015 international consensus diagnostic criteria for NMOSD and were treated with azathioprine for at least 10 years. Results: Out of 375 patients assessed for eligibility, 19 were included in this analysis. These patients’ median age was 44 years (range=28-61); they were mostly female (17/19) and AQP4-IgG seropositive (18/19). The median disease duration was 15 years (range=10-39) and most patients presented a relapsing clinical course (84.2%). The median duration of treatment was 11.9 years (range=10.0-23.8). The median annualized relapse rates (ARR) pre- and post-treatment with azathioprine were 1 (range=0.1-2) and 0.1 (range=0-0.35); p=0.09. Three patients (15.7%) had records of adverse events during the follow-up, which consisted of chronic B12 vitamin deficiency, pulmonary tuberculosis and breast cancer. Conclusion: Azathioprine may be considered a safe agent for long-term treatment (>10 years) of NMOSD, but continuous vigilance for infections and malignancies is required.


2021 ◽  
pp. jrheum.201376
Author(s):  
Yoshiya Tanaka ◽  
Tsutomu Takeuchi ◽  
Satoshi Soen ◽  
Hisashi Yamanaka ◽  
Toshiyuki Yoneda ◽  
...  

Objective To evaluate safety and efficacy of long-term denosumab 60 mg every 6 (Q6M) or 3 months (Q3M) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. Methods This 12-month, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trial with an open-label extension period from 12 to 36 months (DESIRABLE) enrolled Japanese RA patients treated with placebo for 12 months then denosumab Q6M (P/Q6M) or denosumab Q3M (P/Q3M); denosumab Q6M for 36 months (Q6M/Q6M); or denosumab Q3M for 36 months (Q3M/Q3M). Efficacy was assessed by van der Heijde modified total Sharp (mTSS), bone erosion (ES), and joint space narrowing (JSN) scores. Results Long-term treatment better maintained mTSS and ES suppression in the P/Q3M and Q3M/Q3M versus P/Q6M and Q6M/Q6M groups; changes from baseline in total mTSS at 36 months were 2.8 (standard error 0.4), 1.7 (0.3), 3.0 (0.4), and 2.4 (0.3), respectively; corresponding changes in ES were 1.3 (0.2), 0.4 (0.2), 1.4 (0.2), and 1.1 (0.2). No JSN effect was observed. Bone mineral density consistently increased in all groups after denosumab initiation, regardless of concomitant glucocorticoid administration. Serum C-telopeptide of type I collagen decreased rapidly at 1-month post-denosumab administration (both in the initial 12- month [Q3M, Q6M groups] and long-term treatment [P/Q3M, P/Q6M groups] phases). Adverse event incidence leading to study drug discontinuation was similar across treatment groups. Conclusion Denosumab treatment maintained inhibition of progression of joint destruction up to 36 months. Based on effects on ES progression, higher dosing frequency at an earlier treatment stage may be needed to optimise treatment. Denosumab was generally well tolerated.


2009 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 591-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Caporali ◽  
Marta Caprioli ◽  
Francesca Bobbio-Pallavicini ◽  
Serena Bugatti ◽  
Carlomaurizio Montecucco

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document