Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0027497 (nausea)
 23,468 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

To investigate the pharmacokinetics and effects of intravenous foscarnet, 13 relatively healthy male patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection and a mean CD4+ lymphocyte value of 0.45 x 10(-9) cells per liter were given a continuous intravenous infusion of foscarnet (0.14 to 0.19 mg/kg per min) for 8 to 21 days. Blood and urine samples were taken during and after drug administration to monitor foscarnet concentrations. Lumbar puncture was performed during the infusion in five patients. The concentrations in plasma showed large variations both within and between patients. The disposition of foscarnet could be explained by a triexponential equation (t1/2 lambda 1, 0.40 to 2.52 h; t1/2 lambda 2, 3.20 to 16.7 h; t1/2 lambda 3, 36 to 196 h). Renal clearance accounted for most of the plasma clearance, the difference probably reflecting the passage of foscarnet into bone. Up to 20% of the cumulative dose may have been deposited in bone 7 days postinfusion. Foscarnet was distributed to the cerebrospinal fluid in a concentration varying from 13 to 68% of the simultaneous concentration in plasma. Polyuria and polydipsia were recorded in all patients. There appears to be an association between the degree of malaise, including symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and headache, and concentrations in plasma above 350 mumol/liter.
 ...
PMID:Pharmacokinetics of foscarnet and distribution to cerebrospinal fluid after intravenous infusion in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. 252 39

Ten patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome with newly diagnosed cytomegalovirus (CMV) retinitis were treated with an induction regimen of intravenous foscarnet, 60 mg/kg of body weight, administered as a 2-h infusion and repeated every 8 h for 14 days. At the end of induction, 9 of 10 patients had stabilized (no new retinal lesions and stable old lesions [7 patients]) or improved (decreased retinal opacification [2 patients]). All eight patients with CMV in urine or blood upon entry into the study had negative urine and blood cultures at the end of induction. After induction therapy, seven patients continued maintenance foscarnet therapy, 60 mg/kg as a single daily infusion, 5 days/week. In six patients, retinal lesions increased in size after 2 to 32 weeks of maintenance therapy. One was invaluable because a retinal detachment developed. Only 9 of 42 blood and urine cultures obtained during maintenance foscarnet therapy yielded CMV, compared with 7 of 14 obtained prior to the initiation of foscarnet induction therapy (P = 0.04). Foscarnet toxicity was mild and infrequent: elevation in serum creatinine by 0.5 to 1.3 mg/dl over the base line (two patients), muscle twitching (three patients), hemoglobin decrease by 1 mg/dl (two patients), nausea (two patients), absolute neutrophil count decrease by 50% (one patient), rise in serum phosphorus to greater than 5.5 mg/dl (four patients), and proteinuria (two patients). Intermittently administered intravenous foscarnet appears to be an effective, relatively nontoxic therapy for CMV retinitis. Additional studies to determine the optimal dosage for maintenance therapy are needed, as are comparative trials with ganciclovir.
 ...
PMID:Foscarnet treatment of cytomegalovirus retinitis in patients with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. 254 90

This article suggests ways to manage the dose-limiting adverse reactions caused by foscarnet so that this agent may be used with confidence as first-line therapy in patients with cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease. Foscarnet (trisodium phosphonoformate) has been used for the treatment of CMV disease in patients who are infected with HIV. Some physicians who treat patients with CMV infection are reluctant to use foscarnet because of the serious adverse effects that may occur, especially during the induction period. The most frequently reported serious adverse effects are nephrotoxicity, electrolyte disturbances, nausea, penile ulcerations and seizures. The nephrotoxicity associated with foscarnet is attributable to renal tubular damage, and may be minimised by calculating and infusing the appropriate dose after hydrating the patient. Monitoring serum electrolyte levels and replacing electrolytes before symptoms occur may limit the development of dosage-limiting toxicities. Nausea occurring during foscarnet infusions may be ameliorated by using antiemetics and slowing the infusion rate. Seizures associated with the use of this agent are mostly a result of the simultaneous presence of other CNS pathologies. Penile ulcers are best managed by stopping the infusion until the ulcers heal; they may be prevented by paying careful attention to personal hygiene.
 ...
PMID:Minimising the dosage-limiting toxicities of foscarnet induction therapy. 911 93

Dr. Leo Hollister's excellent article begins to address the need for better understanding of the effects of cannabis use on health. The last five years in the US have seen an increase in advocacy groups extolling the medicinal utility of cannabis. On 5 November 1996, this culminated in California (proposition 215) joining the list of states permitting the limited use of cannabis for the medicinal treatment of disorders including intractable pain, glaucoma, nausea induced by chemotherapy for cancer or by AZT or Foscavir for the treatment of AIDS, and for spasticity associated with multiple sclerosis (Burstein, 1997; West and Homi, 1996; Grinspoon and Bakalar, 1995; Nahas and Manger, 1995). Of these potential uses for cannabis, the evidence for the treatment of nausea and the stimulation of appetite in cachetic patients appears most promising (for a review see Voth and Schwartz, 1997). Yet not only do doubts remain about the effectiveness of cannabis for the treatment of these conditions, since definitive controlled clinical studies are typically lacking (Voelker, 1997), but there is concern that any therapeutic advantage is more than offset by its harmful effects. Within this context of increased medical sanction for the use of cannabis in specific disease states for which it may have therapeutic potential, evaluating its risks vs. benefits profile is essential to rational prescribing. In addition, evaluating the public health risks associated with reports of increased risks of cannabis use (Robertson et al., Poulton et al., 1997), is of concern to advocates of its widespread legalization, governmental agencies attempting to limit its promulgation, and to planners and providers of health care charged with providing treatment for its consequences.
 ...
PMID:Comment on 'Health aspects of cannabis: revisited' (Hollister). 1128 48