Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0015672 (fatigue)
 51,768 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Cilazapril is a new once-daily angiotensin-converting (ACE) enzyme inhibitor which has been administered to 4,500 patients with mainly mild to moderate essential hypertension in a multinational clinical research program. Sitting diastolic blood pressure was reduced by about 9 mm Hg from baseline (p less than 0.01) after 4 weeks of treatment with cilazapril 1.25-10 mg/day in double-blind placebo-controlled studies. Total responder rates to cilazapril were usually 50-60% compared with 30% to placebo. Adding hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg/day to cilazapril 5.0 mg/day increased the total responder rate from 52 to 71%. Double-blind dose titration studies for 8 weeks showed that cilazapril 2.5-5 mg/day possessed equivalent efficacy to usual therapeutic regimens of sustained release propranolol, captopril, hydrochlorothiazide, atenolol and enalapril, Cilazapril did not affect heart rate. During long-term open administration for 52 weeks, or longer, cilazapril, either alone or in combination with hydrochlorothiazide, effectively maintained control of blood pressure. Treatment of patients with severe hypertension with cilazapril plus hydrochlorothiazide achieved a total responder rate of 73%. Adverse events were mostly observed within the first 8-16 weeks of treatment, with headache, dizziness, fatigue, nausea, cough and chest pain being the most frequent. Non-life-threatening angioedema, facial edema and mild hypotension occurred in less than or equal to 0.2% of patients, and orthostatic hypotension was reported in 2%. Abnormal laboratory test values were rarely found with cilazapril treatment. Of the 2.3% of patients with elevated serum creatinine, at any time point during the study and irrespective of outcome on continuation with cilazapril therapy, about two thirds had prior renal impairment.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Cilazapril: an overview of its efficacy and safety in hypertension. 153 34

Enalapril is an effective agent in the treatment of mild to severe hypertension. It is equally effective in elderly and young adult patients but appears to be more effective in white than in black hypertensive patients. Following treatment with enalapril, an assessment of maximum exercise performance found a decrease in total peripheral resistance without significant changes in cardiac output, heart rate, or stroke volume compared with pretreatment values. In addition, there have been reports of reversal of left ventricular hypertrophy in enalapril-treated hypertensive patients. Enalapril is also effective and well tolerated in hypertensive patients with renal impairment of varying etiology. The most common adverse experiences reported in controlled clinical trials were headache (5.2%), dizziness (4.3%), and fatigue (3.0%). In high-risk hypertensive patients, no enalapril-treated neutropenia, proteinuria, dysgeusia, or ageusia were reported. It may be concluded that the benefit-to-risk ratio of enalapril is among the best of the antihypertensive therapies currently available.
 ...
PMID:Enalapril: benefit-to-risk ratio in hypertensive patients. 169 15

Data from clinical trials with benazepril suggest that the safety profile of benazepril is similar to that of other angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. Treatment-related side effects occurred in 20% of benazepril-treated patients and in 18% of patients receiving placebo. The most commonly reported side effects with benazepril were headache, dizziness, and fatigue. The incidence of side effects was not affected by the degree of hypertension, age, gender, race, dosage, or the degree of renal impairment. Side effects believed to be related to the pharmacologic action of ACE inhibitors as a class include symptomatic hypotension, which occurred at a relatively low rate with benazepril, and hyperkalemia and elevation of serum creatinine, which occurred to the same extent with benazepril as has been noted with other ACE inhibitors. The mechanism of cough as an ACE inhibitor side effect is unknown; the incidence was similar to that with other ACE inhibitors. Rash and taste disturbance have occurred rarely with benazepril. The incidence of neutropenia and of proteinuria was the same in both the benazepril and placebo groups. Renal failure in hypertensive patients treated with benazepril has not been reported. Overall, benazepril is generally well tolerated by hypertensive patients. The incidence of most side effects is comparable to that with other ACE inhibitors and placebo.
 ...
PMID:Safety profile of benazepril in essential hypertension. 189 40

In a prospective open study, seven patients with persistent pustulosis palmaris et plantaris were treated with oral Cyclosporin A (CsA). Clinical efficacy was assessed on a semi-quantitative 0-4 point scale for erythema, desquamation, induration and pustulation. CsA controlled skin lesions in doses ranging from 1.1 to 6.1 mg/kg body weight/day. Clinical side effects included renal impairment, nausea and tiredness. Rapid recurrence of the skin lesions was observed on withdrawal or insufficient treatment with the drug.
 ...
PMID:Oral cyclosporin A is effective in clearing persistent pustulosis palmaris et plantaris. 196 83

Recently there has been extensive development of orally active angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in addition to those already marketed, for example, captopril, enalapril, lisinopril and ramipril. It was initially thought that ACE inhibitors were likely to be most useful as antihypertensive agents in conditions in which circulating renin and angiotensin II were elevated. However, it is now clear that they can also lower arterial pressure when plasma renin is not high. In addition, they have beneficial effects in cardiac failure. Thus, captopril, enalapril, lisinopril and ramipril can be used in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension either alone or in conjunction with diuretics or calcium antagonists. Broadly speaking, efficacy appears to be similar to that of beta-blockers or diuretics. Unfortunately, however, there are no long term studies comparing one ACE inhibitor with another or with other classes of antihypertensive agents. Furthermore, there are no prognostic studies which show that use of ACE inhibitors reduces morbidity or mortality in hypertension. Many new ACE inhibitors are undergoing clinical assessment, including alacepril, cilazapril, fosenopril, perindopril, quinapril and ramipril. The drugs vary, in that some exist in the active form whereas others are prodrugs which are converted to the active agent following absorption. In addition they each possess one of several ligands, for example, carboxyl, phosphinyl or sulfhydryl groups, and so vary in their affinity for ACE. Although many of these agents are renally excreted, a small number are metabolised via the liver (e.g. quinapril and spirapril) and this may prove advantageous in the presence of renal impairment. In common with captopril and enalapril, the new ACE inhibitors inhibit the renin-angiotensin system and initial results suggest that they are effective in lowering blood pressure in essential hypertension. Furthermore, they reduce systemic vascular resistance in the absence of a reflex tachycardia. There are a number of adverse effects which are attributable to the pharmacological mechanism of the ACE inhibitors as a group; these include hypotension, particularly in patients with high renin levels, prior diuretic use, renal impairment or in the elderly. Additional adverse effects may relate to chemical structure. The high incidence of adverse effects noted in early studies related to excess dosage and to the presence of a sulfhydryl group, which the more recently developed ACE inhibitors lack. The adverse effects most commonly reported with established and new ACE inhibitors include headache and fatigue, cough, skin rashes, hypotension and diarrhoea. As a group, ACE inhibitors have an acceptable but not negligible adverse effect burden.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and moderate hypertension. 222 19

The safety and tolerability of lisinopril were assessed in 1,476 patients [1,165 hypertensives and 311 patients with congestive heart failure (CHF)] and 211 normal volunteers. The duration of lisinopril therapy ranged from 1 day to 16 months, with a mean duration of 105 days. In the hypertensive population, the most frequent clinical adverse experiences on lisinopril alone were headache, dizziness, cough, and diarrhea. Not all of these adverse experiences were thought to be drug related. Five percent of patients were discontinued because of adverse clinical experiences; cough and dizziness were the most common reasons for discontinuation. Two of 1,165 (0.17%) hypertensive patients treated with lisinopril died, compared to 0.41% of hypertensive patients on other therapies. Neither case was considered to be drug related. In patients with CHF, the most frequent clinical adverse experiences were dizziness, diarrhea, hypotension, fatigue, headache, and rash. Not all of these adverse experiences were thought to be drug related. The percent of CHF patients discontinuing because of an adverse clinical experience was 7.4%; the most frequent causes for discontinuation were hypotension, dizziness, or renal impairment. Twelve deaths occurred in 311 CHF patients treated with lisinopril (3.9%) compared to 4/104 (3.8%) of CHF patients treated with placebo and 2/65 (3.1%) treated with captopril. Hypotension, orthostatic effects, or dizziness following the initial lisinopril dose occurred infrequently in patients treated with lisinopril. In hypertensive patients with normal renal function, including those treated previously or concomitantly with diuretic therapy, a first-dose hypotensive episode was reported in six of 955, or 0.6%. The incidence was higher (6.7%) in hypertensive patients with impaired renal function.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:The safety and tolerability of lisinopril in clinical trials. 244 61

A randomized, parallel, double-blind study was performed with lisinopril, a long-acting angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, versus captopril, a shorter-acting angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, in the treatment of congestive heart failure. All patients were in New York Heart Association class II, III or IV and had remained symptomatic despite therapy with digoxin and diuretics. After a 4 to 14 day placebo baseline period, patients were randomized to receive either lisinopril, 5 mg orally once per day (n = 94), or captopril, 12.5 mg orally three times per day (n = 95), in addition to continuation of digoxin and diuretics. The dose of study drug could be doubled at 4 week intervals for a total of 12 weeks of double-blind therapy. The maximal dose was 20 mg once per day of lisinopril or 50 mg three times per day of captopril. The addition of either lisinopril or captopril to a regimen of diuretics or digoxin, or both, caused an increase in exercise duration as assessed on a motorized treadmill. When protocol violators were excluded, patients receiving lisinopril had a statistically greater increase in exercise duration than that of patients receiving captopril. In patients with renal impairment (serum creatinine greater than 1.6 mg/dl at baseline), lisinopril was superior to captopril in improving exercise duration. Lisinopril, but not captopril, increased left ventricular ejection fraction in patients with moderately to severely (less than 35%) decreased function (p less than 0.05). Improvement in functional capacity and quality of life, as assessed by the Yale Scale dyspnea/fatigue index, was significantly greater for the lisinopril group.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Short- and long-acting angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors: a randomized trial of lisinopril versus captopril in the treatment of congestive heart failure. The Multicenter Lisinopril-Captopril Congestive Heart Failure Study Group. 215 58

Sarcoidosis is a multisystem disease of unknown etiology that is rarely diagnosed in children. When mass screening is performed, the incidence of the disease in children approaches that of adults with similar demographics. Most childhood cases occur around ages 9 to 15 years, with small clusters of cases occurring in children under age 4 years. The disease in these two age groups has very different clinical features. Children under age 4 have a clinical triad of rash, arthritis, and uveitis. The classic syndrome in older children involves primarily lungs, lymph nodes, and eyes. In older children, constitutional symptoms (fatigue, lethargy, malaise) and pulmonary symptoms (cough, dyspnea) predominate. Mortality in childhood sarcoidosis is about 5%, with long-term sequelae in 10% to 20%. Early recognition may prevent complications such as blindness, pulmonary insufficiency, and renal impairment.
 ...
PMID:Sarcoidosis in children. 332 85

Carvedilol is a beta-adrenoceptor antagonist which also causes peripheral vasodilation primarily via alpha 1-adrenergic blockade. Carvedilol produces its antihypertensive effect partly by reducing total peripheral resistance by blocking alpha 1-adrenoceptors and by preventing beta-adrenoceptor-mediated compensatory mechanisms. This combined action avoids many of the unwanted effects associated with traditional beta-blocker or vasodilator therapy. In clinical trials published to date, most of which enrolled small numbers of patients, the antihypertensive efficacy of carvedilol administered once daily was similar to that of atenolol, labetalol, pindolol, propranolol, metoprolol, nitrendipine (in elderly patients), slow release nifedipine or captopril in patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension. Combined therapy with carvedilol 25 mg and hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg, nicardipine 60 mg or slow release nifedipine 20 mg has an additive antihypertensive effect. Carvedilol and atenolol at similar doses were equally effective at reducing blood pressure in patients who had previously not responded adequately to hydrochlorothiazide monotherapy. As a result of its multiple mechanisms of action, carvedilol is suited for the management of specific groups of hypertensive patients, such as those with renal impairment. In patients with non-insulin-dependent or insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus carvedilol does not appear to affect glucose tolerance or carbohydrate metabolism. Initial studies have demonstrated that carvedilol and slow release nifedipine have similar efficacy in patients with stable angina pectoris and there is evidence that carvedilol has a beneficial haemodynamic effect in patients with congestive heart failure (NYHA class II or III) secondary to ischaemic heart disease. A postmarketing surveillance study has shown that carvedilol is generally well tolerated with only 7% (164/2226) of patients (83% of the total number received 25mg daily for 12 weeks) withdrawing from treatment because of adverse events. Vertigo, headache, bronchospasm, fatigue and skin reactions were the most common events causing withdrawal. Thus, clinical experience to date suggests that carvedilol is likely to be a valuable addition to the options currently available for treating patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension, and may offer particular benefit in specific populations of hypertensive patients.
 ...
PMID:Carvedilol. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic efficacy. 768 74

Amantadine and rimantadine are recommended for the treatment and prophylaxis of influenza A infections, and constitute an integral component of influenza control measures in the nursing home setting. However, optimal use necessitates a thorough understanding of the toxicity profiles of these agents, as well as strategies to reduce the risk of adverse reactions. Adverse reactions of these compounds predominantly involve the gastrointestinal tract and the central nervous system (CNS), including hyperexcitability, slurred speech, tremors, insomnia, dizziness, mood disturbance, ataxia, psychosis and fatigue. Based on data from comparative trials, rimantadine appears to exhibit a lesser propensity to cause adverse CNS reactions than amantadine, but a similar propensity to cause adverse gastrointestinal reactions. Factors enhancing the risk of adverse reactions to these agents include reduced renal function (especially for amantadine), drug-drug interactions with cationic drugs, which inhibit amantadine renal tubular secretion (e.g. trimethoprim, triamterene, and possibly cimetidine and procainamide), elevated peak and trough plasma concentrations, and a history of seizures. Careful attention to published dosage adjustment guidelines for these compounds, avoidance of interacting drugs and avoiding these agents in patients with a history of seizures may be the best means to reduce the risk of toxicity in elderly patients. Rimantadine may have an advantage over amantadine in the elderly population in light of its lesser propensity to cause adverse reactions, less complex dosage adjustment in the case of renal impairment and probable lack of drug-drug interaction potential with cationic drugs.
 ...
PMID:Amantadine and rimantadine prophylaxis of influenza A in nursing homes. A tolerability perspective. 791 41


1 2 3 4 5 Next >>