Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0018681 (headache)
 56,091 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

A 45-year-old woman was admitted suffering from headache, weight loss, asthenia, pedal edema, and amenorrhea. Morphological and functional studies revealed an intrasellar mass causing hypopituitarism without diabetes insipidus. Histological examination of the tissue obtained at transsphenoidal surgery was compatible with a diagnosis of sarcoidosis. The clinical and histological features, together with the presence of cutaneous anergy and ocular lesions, led to the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. The presentation of sarcoidosis in this patient was very unusual because it was not accompanied by characteristic intrathoracic findings or by diabetes insipidus.
 ...
PMID:Intrasellar mass with hypopituitarism as a manifestation of sarcoidosis. Case report. 236 86

Nicardipine and nifedipine are structurally similar dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers with demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of stable angina pectoris. The present study was a prospective randomized trial designed to evaluate the relative incidence of dizziness, flushing, headache, pedal edema, and palpitations during use of these drugs in patients with angina pectoris. Of 250 patients who entered into the comparative treatment part of the study, 140 patients were susceptible to developing symptoms to nifedipine as identified during a 1-month open-label treatment with nifedipine. These patients were compared with a parallel cohort of 110 patients, who were identified during the same open-label period, but remained mostly asymptomatic. After a 1-week washout of nifedipine, equal numbers of patients in each cohort began an 8-week period of randomized, double-blind treatment with nifedipine (20 mg three times daily) or nicardipine (30 mg three times daily). Patients who experienced these symptoms during the open-label nifedipine treatment had a higher incidence of the same symptoms during the blinded treatment regimen. Nicardipine-treated patients had a lower incidence of each of the symptoms than did the nifedipine-treated patients. Statistically significant differences were reported for dizziness, the most common of the side effects. Patients who were free of these symptoms in the open-label period usually remained free of them in the blinded comparison. However, even among those free of dizziness during the open-label nifedipine treatment, more patients reported experiencing dizziness in the blinded phase from nifedipine than from nicardipine (18% vs 6%; p = 0.02).
 ...
PMID:Randomized double-blind comparison of side effects of nicardipine and nifedipine in angina pectoris. The Nicardipine Investigators Group. 240 16

Nicardipine is currently being evaluated in clinical trials as a treatment for angina and hypertension. Over 2,000 patients have received nicardipine, most at dosages of 20 to 40 mg 3 times daily. In 12 double-blind, parallel-group studies (4 of them placebo-controlled) the efficacy of nicardipine was evaluated in mild to moderate hypertension; supine systolic blood pressure was lowered by 10 to 15 mm Hg and supine diastolic blood pressure by 10 mm Hg. A clear dose response is present at dosages from 10 to 40 mg 3 times daily. Patients with angina were treated in 9 double-blind, crossover design studies: 4 of these were placebo-controlled; 3 were comparison studies with beta blockers; 2 were comparisons with nifedipine. Treadmill exercise tests were the major measure of efficacy. Results of these studies showed consistent, statistically significant improvement in exercise tolerance and time to onset of angina, and clinical improvement in patients with chronic stable angina. The effective dosages of nicardipine were 30 or 40 mg 3 times daily. A placebo-controlled study demonstrated remarkable efficacy in patients with vasospastic angina. No deaths or serious adverse reactions were attributed to nicardipine during clinical trials. The most common side effects reported were flushing, palpitations, headache and pedal edema. These appeared to be due to the drug's pharmacologic property of vasodilatation.
 ...
PMID:An overview of the safety and efficacy of nicardipine in clinical trials. 330 Feb 39

Endralazine, a novel vasodilator related to hydralazine, exhibits a longer half-life and is only minimally influenced by acetylator status. The antihypertensive action of once daily endralazine has been studied in 17 patients previously controlled with an antihypertensive regimen which included hydralazine and a beta-blocker. Hydralazine was discontinued but other medications were unchanged. Pre-study dosage of hydralazine ranged from 25 mg b.i.d. to 50 mg g.i.d., mean daily dose 126.5 mg. Endralazine was started at a dose of 10 mg o.d. and increased by 10 mg to a maximum of 40 mg o.d. until seated DBP was controlled below 95 mmHg. All 17 patients completed the study. Seated BP significantly decreased from 147.5/99.7 to 133.8/83.9 and standing BP from 145.8/99.2 to 133.6/87.3 mmHg. Ten patients (59%) were successfully controlled with endralazine once daily but 7 patients required twice daily dosage schedules because of lack of BP control at 24 h after dosing or excessive hypotension shortly after dosing. Other adverse effects were headache, palpitations and fatigue. There was a statistically insignificant average weight gain of 1 kg but pedal edema was not observed. Endralazine is an effective antihypertensive agent with adverse symptoms similar to those experienced with hydralazine.
 ...
PMID:Evaluation of once daily endralazine in hypertension. 375 43

A hypertensive urgency should be distinguished from a hypertensive emergency. Although the distinction may not always be obvious, certain guidelines may help the clinician determine which therapeutic approaches are most appropriate for each patient. Hypertensive emergencies include those conditions in which new or progressive severe end-organ damage is present and a delay in appropriate therapy might result in permanent damage, progression of complications, and a poor prognosis. Hypertensive urgencies include those conditions with minimal to no obvious end-organ damage in which blood pressure should be lowered expeditiously. The risk of immediate complications or organ damage is less likely to occur, and thus the immediate prognosis is better, although the ultimate prognosis, if untreated, is poor. There is a marked individual, racial, sexual, and age difference in the ability to tolerate high intraarterial pressure, as evidenced by patients' symptoms and signs of end-organ damage. Patients may have no symptoms of elevated blood pressure until significant intraarterial levels are reached. If symptoms are present, they may include headache, dizziness, blurred vision, shortness of breath (especially with exertion), chest pain, rapid pulse, palpitations, malaise and fatigue, nocturia, or pedal edema. Signs of hypertensive disease vary and depend not only on the level of blood pressure but also include funduscopic changes with arteriolar narrowing, atrioventricular nicking, hemorrhages, exudates or papilledema, central nervous system changes and neurologic abnormalities, cardiac changes with gallop rhythm, cardiomegaly, tachycardia, ectopic ventricular beats, left ventricular hypertrophy or signs of congestive heart failure, pulmonary edema, and signs of renal insufficiency.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Hypertensive emergencies and urgencies: pathophysiology and clinical aspects. 394 53

Twelve patients were entered prospectively into a randomized double-blind study comparing the efficacy of nifedipine and isosorbide dinitrate (ISDN) in the treatment of variant angina pectoris due to coronary artery spasm. Using the diary technique, both anginal episodes and nitroglycerin tablets consumed were recorded during the pretrial, no drug period, and both active drug phases. During the baseline pretrial period, an average of 1.1 anginal episodes/day occurred with reduction to 0.28/day during nifedipine treatment and 0.39/day during ISDN treatment. Headache was the major side effect during ISDN treatment, occurring in 9 of 11 (81%) patients; and nonheart failure related pedal edema during nifedipine treatment, occurring in 4 of 12 (33%) patients. Intolerable side effects necessitating cessation of treatment occurred in two patients during nifedipine treatment and in three patients during ISDN treatment. Patients preferred nifedipine over ISDN because of increased efficacy and fewer uncomfortable side effects. We conclude that both nifedipine and ISDN are effective therapy for coronary spasm, but that nifedipine was more effective and was preferred by the majority of patients.
 ...
PMID:Randomized double-blind comparison of nifedipine and isosorbide dinitrate therapy in variant angina pectoris due to coronary artery spasm. 703 13

The efficacy and tolerability of felodipine, in a low dose of 5-10 mg daily was assessed in 32 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension, aged 53 +/- 11 years. The results of office vs 24 h ambulatory blood pressure measurements (ABPM) were compared. Inclusion criteria included an office systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) > 140/90 mm Hg and a 24 h ABPM SBP/DBP > 135/85 mm Hg. Felodipine was initiated at a dose of 5 mg daily. At day 28 of the study, if office DBP > 90 mm Hg, the dose was doubled to 10 mg daily. At the end of the study (day 84), 24 h ABPM was done again. Side effects were noted throughout the study. Four patients dropped out during the study (two due to headache, one due to pedal edema and one rejected further participation). Of the remaining 28 patients, at day 28, 12 required an increased dose of 10 mg/day. At the end of the study, office BP was below 140 90 mm Hg in 71% of the patients. In the whole group BP decreased from 158 +/- 15/101 +/- 8.4 to 138 +/- 9/85 +/- 5 mm Hg, P < 0.001. ABPM showed that BP was normalized in 82% of the patients. It decreased from 146.8 +/- 9.56/94.8 +/- 7.4 to 130.2 +/- 10.6/83 +/- 6.3 mm Hg, P < 0.001. BP was similarly reduced in working and sleeping hours, with preservation of the circadian rhythm. Heart rate was unaffected by the drug. Five patients showed persistently elevated SBP on office measurements while on ABPM, the values were within normal limits. This finding confirms the existence of a white coat effect in patients with proven hypertension and the superiority of ABPM over office BP measurements in clinical investigations. In summary, ABPM showed that the antihypertensive effect of felodipine was sustained throughout normal 24 h, including the critical (as regards cardiovascular morbidity) awakening hours.
 ...
PMID:Efficacy of low felodipine dose monotherapy in mild-to-moderate hypertension: a comparison between office and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. 887 49

The safety and tolerability of mibefradil, a selective T-type calcium channel antagonist, were evaluated in 3,430 patients with essential hypertension and chronic stable angina pectoris treated in 15 double-blind placebo and active-controlled clinical trials and 2 open-label, long-term safety studies. Of these patients, 2,636 were treated with the recommended doses of mibefradil (50 and 100 mg) and form the basis of this report. With the 50-mg dose of mibefradil, the incidence of each adverse event was similar to, or lower than, that observed in the placebo-treated patients. Treatment with the 100-mg dose was associated with a slightly higher incidence compared to placebo of dizziness (2.1% vs 1.8%), leg edema (3.5% vs 1.4%), fatigue (2.1% vs 1.4%), and lightheadedness (2.1% vs 0.4%). The incidence of headache (4.6%) and angina pectoris (1.1%) was more frequent in patients treated with placebo. In active-controlled trials, a lower incidence of pedal edema (5.1%) was observed with mibefradil compared to amlodipine (25.7%), diltiazem SR/CD (9.4%), or nifedipine SR/GITS (17.4%). Overall, mibefradil was better tolerated than amlodipine and nifedipine SR/GITS and was as well tolerated as diltiazem SR/CD. Rates of premature discontinuation due to clinically adverse experiences with the 50- and 100-mg doses were 2.5% and 3.5%, respectively, compared with placebo (3.5%). No consistent pattern of laboratory adverse experiences were observed for mibefradil. Sinus bradycardia (heart rate <45 beats/minute) and first-degree atrioventricular block were the only relevant treatment-emergent electrocardiographic changes that occurred more frequently with mibefradil than with placebo. No evidence of first-dose effects was observed in mibefradil-treated patients, and withdrawal effects were not observed in clinical trials. There were no clinically important differences in safety profiles in the demographic subgroups for age, gender, or race. The results of this comprehensive safety analysis indicate that treatment with the recommended doses of mibefradil is well tolerated and safe.
 ...
PMID:Safety of mibefradil, a new once-a-day, selective T-type calcium channel antagonist. 928 53

The rationale behind combination therapy relates to the fact that when two different classes of agents are combined, they may provide complementary, additive, or synergistic antihypertensive effects through different mechanisms. Lower doses of two drugs, which provide blood pressure reduction similar to higher doses of one drug, may enhance tolerability and improve compliance. Investigative efforts have been undertaken to explore fixed-dose combinations of drugs that do not include diuretics. The first nondiuretic fixed-dose combinations are an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor-calcium antagonist combination or a beta-blocker-calcium antagonist combination. The rationale for an ACE inhibitor-calcium antagonist combination is based on the fact that both drugs reduce vasoconstriction through different mechanisms. The ACE inhibitor largely attenuates vasoconstriction through augmentation of vasodilatory kinins and reduction of the vasoconstrictive effect of angiotensin II, whereas the calcium antagonists, through attenuating the transmembrane flux of calcium, inhibit calcium-mediated electromechanical coupling in contractile tissue in response to numerous stimuli. Moreover, both classes of drugs facilitate salt and water excretion by the kidney through different mechanisms. The ACE inhibitor restores the renal-adrenal response to salt loading, whereas the calcium antagonist possesses intrinsic natriuretic properties through poorly described mechanisms of inhibiting renal tubular salt and water reabsorption. The combination of a beta-blocker and dihydropyridine calcium antagonist is logical due to the different antihypertensive mechanisms of these drugs without risk of cardiac conduction abnormalities. There is evidence in clinical trials that ACE inhibitors may offset one of the major side effects associated with calcium antagonist therapy: pedal edema. Although the studies are small and the observations subjective, there is consistent evidence that the combination may provide an opportunity to reduce the likelihood of this common clinical problem. There is also evidence of reduced calcium antagonist-associated constipation and headache with this type of drug combination, likely because lower doses of this agent are used in combination with ACE inhibitors. However, there is no published evidence that calcium antagonists reduce the cough associated with the ACE inhibitor.
 ...
PMID:The rationale for combination versus single-entity therapy in hypertension. 979 51

The safety and efficacy of Amlodipine (AML) for mild to moderate hypertension was evaluated in a "real life" setting. This open non-comparative trial included 123 men and 143 women (age 30-91 years, mean 59.4). All had sitting diastolic blood pressure (DBP) between 95 and 115 mmHg, confirmed in most by 2 baseline measurements, 2 weeks apart. Eligible patients were given AML 5 mg daily as add-on or monotherapy and were evaluated 4 weeks later. If DBP was then > 90 mmHg, the daily dose was raised to 10 mg; those with < 90 mmHg remained on 5 mg. AML was continued for 8 weeks. Other BP-lowering drugs were unchanged. Of the original 266 patients 22 (8.2%) withdrew due to adverse events (AE), and others were protocol violators, lost to follow-up or withdrew, leaving 211 available for efficacy analysis. In this major group BP was reduced from 165 +/- 15/101 +/- 4 to 139 +/- 11/83 +/- 5 after 12 weeks of AML (p < 0.05). The reduction was greater in those under 70 years, from 173 +/- 12/100 +/- 5 to 142 +/- 12/80 +/- 4 (p < 0.05). In those with BMI > 30 kg/m2, BP decreased from 165 +/- 15/101 +/- 5 to 140 +/- 12/83 +/- 5 (p < 0.05). Mean change in heart rate was -1.5 bpm (p < 0.05). Mean final AML dose was 5.5 mg/day. The most common AML-related AE requiring cessation of the drug was pedal edema in 2.6% of the 266 patients; in 3.7% it persisted during therapy. Other AE occurring in > 1% were dizziness in 1.8%, headache 1.5%, flushing 1.1% and fatigue 1.1%. We conclude that AML is an effective and well-tolerated antihypertensive suitable for most hypertensive patients.
 ...
PMID:[Multicenter community-based trial of amlodipine in hypertension in Israel]. 1095 90


1 2 Next >>