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)

Pain is the main reason prompting patients to consult their physicians. In acute conditions, pain has a very particular significance as a warning sign, enabling the physician to attempt a diagnosis. Nevertheless, its detrimental effect upon the individual (even in the case of acute pain) and its cost to society are now widely acknowledged. There can be no doubt about the physical component of pain, but the psychological and social aspects should not be ignored, particularly in the case of chronic pain. There is no single therapeutic approach to pain and, more often than not, successful treatment comprises a combination of several. Pharmacological treatments are undeniably the most common approach. In clinical practice, recent advances have been based upon an improved understanding of 'old' substances such as morphine and, at the same time, research continues in the hope of finding the 'ideal' analgesic-effective in most situations but without adverse effects: this appears to be a somewhat utopian arm at present, considering the number of different causes of pain. An improved understanding of the physiological mechanisms of pain has led, within the field of clinical practice, to several methods of differentiating pain. These depend on whether or not pain responds to morphine, or on the type of pain: pain due to an excess of nociception, pain resulting from deafferentation (caused by damage to nerve pathways) in the central or peripheral nervous system and psychogenic (idiopathic) pain. Likewise, there are several different ways of classifying analgesic treatments: according to the intensity of pain, as with use of the WHO ladder (which is based on the notion of steps) for the treatment of cancer pain; according to the presumed physiopathological mechanism and, in particular, the response to morphine, and according to the presumed central or peripheral mechanism of the drugs. In reality, peripherally acting drugs can also have a central mechanism of action, just as drugs known to have a central mechanism of action can also have peripheral activity. As a result, several therapeutic classes have been identified. Firstly NSAIDs, which act by inhibiting the enzymes that synthesise prostaglandins, cyclooxygenases (COX-1, COX-2), but which also act upon lipo-oxygenases: Their efficacy is interesting, although somewhat limited by both their ceiling effect and the frequent adverse gastrointestinal reactions they produce. Specific inhibitors of COX-2 could well reduce the risk of adverse effects. Opioids constitute the first-line treatment for pain, particularly severe pain. There are several classifications for these drugs. Firstly, weak opioids (such as codeine) and strong opioids (such as morphine) are differentiated. Secondly, a distinction is made between pure agonists (such as morphine), partial agonists (such as buprenorphine), agonist-antagonists (such as nalbuphine) and antagonists (such as naloxone). Finally, agents are distinguished on the basis of their chemical structure (synthetic, semi-synthetic or natural derivatives). These molecules act upon different receptors (mu, delta, kappa, sigma) and, although peripheral mechanisms have been described, their activity occurs mainly at spinal and supraspinal levels. They provide a potent analgesic effect but are also responsible for various adverse effects-nausea, vomiting, sedation, constipation and respiratory depression-which seriously limit their use. As long as the indication is appropriate, these drugs should not be withheld because of fear of dependence or abuse. It has been observed that other adjuvant therapeutic approaches, generally used to treat conditions other than pain, provide pain relief in certain situations. These include corticosteroids, which are-widely used in rheumatology and oncology, and antidepressants, which are frequently used to treat chronic pain, especially that with a neuropathic component. Anti-epileptics are also used, particularly for excrutiating
 ...
PMID:[Review of current pharmacologic treatment of pain]. 919 Mar 20

1. Non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are among the most frequently prescribed medications and are used primarily to control pain, stiffness, and reduce inflammation. 2. One of the most common adverse effects of NSAID therapy is gastrointestinal (GI) problems, specifically indigestion, nausea, dyspepsia, diarrhea, constipation, and gastritis. 3. Considerations in chronic pain management include non-pharmacologic treatment options (i.e., physical therapy, behavioral therapy, etc.), use of misoprostol for clients at high risk for NSAID induced GI problems, and monitoring blood and urine every 3 months to 1 year with chronic NSAID therapy to detect liver, kidney, and hematologic problems. 4. Current research is focused on development of a prostaglandin H synthetase (PGHS-2) inhibitor which should offer efficacy equal to the most potent NSAIDs with minimal side effects, including gastric safety.
 ...
PMID:Non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs. A review. 965 39

Rofecoxib is a selective cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor which has little or no effect on the COX-1 isoenzyme at doses up to 1000 mg/day. Rofecoxib has greater selectivity for COX-2 than celecoxib, meloxicam, diclofenac and indomethacin. In well-controlled clinical trials, rofecoxib 12.5 to 500 mg/day has been evaluated for its efficacy in the treatment of osteoarthritis, acute pain and rheumatoid arthritis [lower dosages (5 to 125 mg/day) were generally used in the chronic pain indications]. In the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis, rofecoxib was more effective in providing symptomatic relief than placebo, paracetamol (acetaminophen) and celecoxib and was similar in efficacy to ibuprofen, diclofenac, naproxen and nabumetone. Overall, both the physician's assessment of disease status and the patient's assessment of response to therapy tended to favour rofecoxib. In patients with postsurgical dental pain, pain after spinal fusion or orthopaedic surgery, or primary dysmenorrhoea, rofecoxib provided more rapid and more sustained pain relief and reduced requirements for supplemental morphine use after surgery than placebo. Rofecoxib was more efficacious than celecoxib in patients with acute dental pain and pain after spinal fusion surgery, although celecoxib may have been used at a subtherapeutic dose. In comparison with traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) ibuprofen, diclofenac and naproxen sodium, rofecoxib was similar in efficacy in the treatment of acute pain. Although naproxen sodium provided more rapid pain relief than rofecoxib in patients with primary dysmenorrhoea, the reverse was true after orthopaedic surgery: rofecoxib provided more rapid pain relief and less supplemental morphine was needed. Rofecoxib was as effective as naproxen in providing symptomatic relief for over 8700 patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Compared with traditional NSAID therapy, rofecoxib had a significantly lower incidence of endoscopically confirmed gastroduodenal ulceration and, in approximately 13,000 patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, a lower incidence of gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events. Rofecoxib was generally well tolerated in all indications with an overall tolerability profile similar to traditional NSAIDs. The most common adverse events in rofecoxib recipients were nausea, dizziness and headache. In conclusion, rofecoxib is at least as effective as traditional NSAID therapy in providing pain relief for both chronic and acute pain conditions. Rofecoxib provides an alternative treatment option to traditional NSAID therapy in the management of symptomatic pain relief in patients with osteoarthritis. Initial data from patients with primary dysmenorrhoea and postoperative pain are promising and further trials may confirm its place in the treatment of these indications. Rofecoxib has also shown promising results in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and is likely to become a valuable addition to current drug therapy for this patient population. Importantly, rofecoxib is associated with a lower incidence of GI adverse events than traditional NSAIDs making it a primary treatment option in patients at risk of developing GI complications or patients with chronic conditions requiring long term treatment.
 ...
PMID:Rofecoxib: a review of its use in the management of osteoarthritis, acute pain and rheumatoid arthritis. 1139 14

Gastrointestinal (GI) Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) from the NSAIDs are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in arthritic patients taking these drugs. The recent much heralded development of COX-2 selective drugs (celecoxib, rofecoxib), the objective of which has been to spare inhibition of the production of COX-1 derived mucosal protective prostaglandins, may have represented an advance in reducing the risk of serious ADRs--ulcers and bleeding--but does not appear to have reduced the incidence of symptomatic side-effects (nausea, vomiting, epigastric pain/heartburn, abdominal discomfort) which are a major reason for withdrawal from NSAID therapy, especially in the long term. The rationale of COX-2 selectivity from these newer drugs is controversial since there may be pharmacokinetic differences from established carboxylate-NSAIDs that accounts for their apparent lower ulcerogenicity. Moreover, concerns have been recently expressed that as COX-2 is important in ulcer healing, control of prostacyclin production and renal function that they may have adverse reactions from these effects. Indeed, recent reports of enhanced risk of congestive heart failure with rofecoxib are of importance and may relate to impaired prostacyclin production. Moreover, there are other therapeutic strategies that have yielded equally low ulcerogenic NSAIDs (e.g. the prodrug, nabumetone; the established COX-2 inhibitory drug, nimesulide) and even the well-established NSAIDs ibuprofen and diclofenac have relatively low upper GI ulcerogenicity and have been used as benchmark standards in comparative trials of the newer "Oxib" drugs (celecoxib, rofecoxib). Much research interest has centred on the nitric oxide-donating NSAIDs (NO-NSAIDs). The rationale for donating NSAIDs being to counteract the vasoconstriction effects of NSAIDs but this has yet to be fully evaluated. It is not certain that this "antidote" approach will be acceptable as there may also be systemic effects of the nitrobutoxyl--or other NO-donors that may have toxicological consequences. Another strategy is the development of mixed COX-5 lipoxygenase (LOX) inhibitors--the progenitors of which were benoxaprofen and BW-755C. The rationale of reducing the potential for lipoxygenase mediated actions in the stomach (e.g. vasoconstriction, leucocyte accumulation). Clearly, the need to develop newer NSAIDs with lower risks of ulcers and bleeding as well as symptomatic ADRs is still representing a major challenge.
 ...
PMID:The ever-emerging anti-inflammatories. Have there been any real advances? 1159 13

Rizatriptan is an effective and fast acting drug for the acute treatment of migraine. As with any other acute treatment for migraine, headache recurrence may occur in up to one-third of responders. Combination with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) seems to reduce the incidence of headache recurrence in clinical practice. Rofecoxib is a member of a new class of NSAIDs, which selectively inhibits the COX-2 enzyme and therefore is associated with a lower risk of gastrointestinal side-effects; the drug has a long plasma half-life (17 h). This open label study compared rizatriptan with rizatriptan plus rofecoxib in the acute treatment of migraine. Fifty-six triptan naive patients from a tertiary centre (37 women and 19 men, ages 16-55 years, mean 35 years) with International Headache Society migraine were randomized into two groups. They were instructed to treat three consecutive moderate or severe attacks with either 10 mg rizatriptan (group 1: 18 women and 10 men) or with 10 mg rizatriptan plus 25 mg rofecoxib (group 2: 19 women and 9 men). The presence of headache and nausea at 1, 2 and 4 h, and of side-effects, use of rescue medication and recurrence were compared. Fifty-four patients completed the study. Group 1 treated 76 attacks and group 2 treated 81 attacks. Absence of headache at 1 h was seen in 19 attacks (25%) in group 1 and in 34 attacks (42%) in group 2 (P=0.082); at 2 h absence of headache was seen in 60% of group 1 attacks and in 76% of group 2 attacks (P=0.115). At 4 h, 75% of group 1 attacks and 88% of group 2 attacks were pain free (P=0.122). With regard to nausea, of those who had nausea at baseline, 31% and 49% of attacks in groups 1 and 2, respectively, were nausea free at 1 h (P=0.091), 75% and 79% at 2 h (P=0.736) and 82% and 91% (P=0.479) at 4 h. Recurrence, based on all attacks of those patients who achieved pain free at 4 h, was observed in 53% of group 1 and 20% of group 2 attacks (P<0.001). Sustained pain-free rates (for the 4-h time point) were 45.6% of group 1 and 78.9% of group 2 attacks. There were no significant differences with regard to rescue medication consumption after 4 h and side-effects in both groups. There was a non-significant trend for the combination group to have a higher response rate. The group treated with rizatriptan and rofecoxib had a lower recurrence rate than the group treated with rizatriptan. This study demonstrated that combining a fast acting triptan such as rizatriptan with rofecoxib reduced headache recurrence rates, was well tolerated and may be more effective than the use of rizatriptan alone. Double-blind, placebo-controlled studies are necessary to confirm these observations.
 ...
PMID:Rizatriptan combined with rofecoxib vs. rizatriptan for the acute treatment of migraine: an open label pilot study. 1210 94

The most frequent gastro-intestinal complications in classical NSAID treatment are presented. Nausea and dispepsy are present in 60 percent, and gastric erosions in 50 percent of patients on regular NSAID treatment. COX-2 inhibitors with lower rate of gastro-intestinal complications are mentioned.
 ...
PMID:[Gastrointestinal complications in treatment with classical nonsteroidal antirheumatic agents]. 1247 56

Nabumetone is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory prodrug, which exerts its pharmacological effects via the metabolite 6-methoxy-2-naphthylacetic acid (6-MNA). Nabumetone itself is non-acidic and, following absorption, it undergoes extensive first-pass metabolism to form the main circulating active metabolite (6-MNA) which is a much more potent inhibitor of preferentially cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2. The three major metabolic pathways of nabumetone are O-demethylation, reduction of the ketone to an alcohol, and an oxidative cleavage of the side-chain occurs to yield acetic acid derivatives. Essentially no unchanged nabumetone and < 1% of the major 6-MNA metabolite are excreted unchanged in the urine from which 80% of the dose can be recovered and another 10% in faeces. Nabumetone is clinically used mainly for the management of patients with osteoarthritis (OA) or rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to reduce pain and inflammation. The clinical efficacy of nabumetone has also been evaluated in patients with ankylosing spondylitis, soft tissue injuries and juvenile RA. The optimum oral dosage of nabumetone for OA patients is 1 g once daily, which is well tolerated. The therapeutic response is superior to placebo and similar to nonselective COX inhibitors. In RA patients, nabumetone 1 g at bedtime is optimal, but an additional 0.5-1 g can be administered in the morning for patients with persistent symptoms. In RA, nabumetone has shown a comparable clinical efficacy to aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid), diclofenac, piroxicam, ibuprofen and naproxen. Clinical trials and a decade of worldwide safety data and long-term postmarketing surveillance studies show that nabumetone is generally well tolerated. The most frequent adverse effects are those commonly seen with COX inhibitors, which include diarrhoea, dyspepsia, headache, abdominal pain and nausea. In common with other COX inhibitors, nabumetone may increase the risk of GI perforations, ulcerations and bleedings (PUBs). However, several studies show a low incidence of PUBs, and on a par with the numbers reported from studies with COX-2 selective inhibitors and considerably lower than for nonselective COX inhibitors. This has been attributed mainly to the non-acidic chemical properties of nabumetone but also to its COX-1/COX-2 inhibitor profile. Through its metabolite 6-MNA, nabumetone has a dose-related effect on platelet aggregation, but no effect on bleeding time in clinical studies. Furthermore, several short-term studies have shown little to no effect on renal function. Compared with COX-2 selective inhibitors, nabumetone exhibits similar anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties in patients with arthritis and there is no evidence of excess GI or other forms of complications to date.
 ...
PMID:Nabumetone: therapeutic use and safety profile in the management of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. 1545 29

With the ever-growing armamentarium of pharmacological agents, the gastrointestinal drug-induced side effects of dyspepsia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and constipation are increasingly seen. They are often self-limiting and without serious sequelae, but of greater concern is drug-induced mucosal ulceration that can manifest as gastrointestinal haemorrhage, stricture and perforation. These complications are mainly attributable to NSAIDs and aspirin, which can injure the mucosa anywhere along the gastrointestinal tract. These iatrogenic serious side effects can be reduced with co-prescription of a proton pump inhibitor, substitution of a COX-2 inhibitor and eradication of Helicobacter pylori when the bacterium is present. Other recognised gastrointestinal complications include small intestinal diaphragm, microscopic colitis, a range of hepatotoxic effects and pancreatitis. The introduction of new classes of drugs has resulted in new adverse effects that require consideration in patients presenting with gastroenterological symptoms. These include pill oesophagitis from bisphosphonates and ischaemic colitis relating to serotonin antagonists. Here, the authors review the literature on drug-induced complications of the gastrointestinal tract and present the pertinent management issues relevant to clinical practice.
 ...
PMID:Drug-induced side effects affecting the gastrointestinal tract. 1677 95

According to World Health Organisation osteo-arthritis is the second commonest musculoskeletal problem in the world. Diacerein has been recently introduced in India for the treatment of osteo-arthritis. In view of the ulcerogenic potential of NSAIDs and the cardiotoxicity problems associated with COX-2 inhibitors, diacerein has the potential of being a non-ulcerogenic and non-cardiotoxic alternative respectively to NSAIDs and of COX-2 inhibitors in the treatment of osteo-arthritis. The present study was, therefore, undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of diacerein in the treatment of osteo-arthritis. A total 7923 patients with osteo-arthritis of the knee fulfilling the selection criteria were enrolled in this open-label, multicentric postmarketing surveillance study. After a wash-out period of one week, patients were treated with 50mg diacerein tablets administered twice daily for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy variable of the present study was to assess the improvement in the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for pain. The secondary variable was improvement in patients' and physicians' global assessment of efficacy of therapy. Results indicated that over the 12-week study period, diacerein 50mg tablets provided significant and sustained reduction the VAS pain scores. At baseline, VAS scores were 6.70 +/- 1.78. By the end of the 4th week, there was a significant reduction in the mean VAS scores by 21.8% and by the end of the study the mean VAS scores were further significantly reduced by 59.9%. As per the patients global assessment of treatment, 82.3% of the patients reported good to very good improvement at the end of 12 weeks therapy with diacerein. Similar responses were also recorded by the treating patients. Thus by the end of 12 weeks therapy, according to the physicians 85.5% of the total cases treated with diacerein were rated as having good to very good improvement. Therapy with diacerein was well tolerated and only 5.44% of the patients had an adverse event after treatment with diacerein. The most common adverse events were diarrhoea (2.3%), gastritis (0.99%), nausea (0.61%), abdominal pain or discomfort (0.44%) and vomiting (0.3%). The severity of the adverse events was mild in all the cases and disappeared with continued treatment. None of the patients dropped out of the study on account of adverse events or lack of efficacy. Thus, in conclusion, the results of the present study in a large population of Indian patients indicates that diacerein constitutes a novel approach to the treatment for the short- and long-term symptomatic management in Indian patients with osteo-arthritis of the knee.
 ...
PMID:An open prospective study on postmarketing evaluation of the efficacy and tolerability of diacerein in osteo-arthritis of the knee (DOK). 1870 72

Traditional treatment of pain following total joint arthroplasty involves postoperative oral narcotic medications and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia, both of which can result in significant postoperative morbidity. Multi-modal analgesia involving >or=2 classes of drugs acting on different receptor types may be as effective as single-narcotic/patient-controlled analgesia with fewer analgesic-related side effects. In addition, administering analgesia prior to surgery (pre-emptive) may reduce postoperative pain intensity. The current study was designed to compare the impact of multi-modal pre-emptive analgesia versus patient-controlled analgesia on postoperative nausea, rehabilitation participation, and length of stay following total joint arthroplasty. A retrospective chart review and comparison was performed for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty who received either postoperatively patient-controlled analgesia or pre-emptive analgesia (scheduled postoperative oxycodone and a COX-2 inhibitor). Length of hospital stay for the pre-emptive group averaged 2.74 vs 3.28 days for patient-controlled analgesia patients. The patient-controlled analgesia group consumed significantly more intravenous morphine (17.7 mg vs 7.2) and experienced a three-fold increase in nausea. In addition, the patient-controlled analgesia group was twice as likely to miss therapy and nearly 2 times more likely to be discharged to an extended care facility. The use of pre-emptive oxycodone and a selective COX-2 inhibitor decreased postoperative narcotic requirements and increased participation in rehabilitation. In addition, patients receiving pre-emptive analgesics had a decreased hospital length of stay and reduced likelihood of discharge to a skilled nursing facility. These data support the continued study and use of pre-emptive multi-modal analgesia paradigms in this population.
 ...
PMID:Multi-modal, pre-emptive analgesia decreases the length of hospital stay following total joint arthroplasty. 1930 64


1 2 Next >>