Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0344232 (blurred vision)
 2,072 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Fifty patients (25 per group) with the signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis confirmed by positive skin test enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, parallel group, 2-week comparison of pentigetide, 0.5%, ophthalmic solution (Pentyde) and cromolyn sodium, 4%, USP ophthalmic solution (Opticrom). The physician and the patient rated the patient's overall ocular condition on days 3, 8, and 15. On day 15 both the physician and the patients rated the pentigetide group as significantly (Chi-square, P less than .05) more improved than the cromolyn sodium group. The physician rated independently conjunctival symptoms and ocular signs at days 1, 3, 8, and 15. Improvement in signs and symptoms favored pentigetide in the majority of comparisons to cromolyn sodium (14 of 18). The pentigetide group showed significantly (ANOVA, P less than .05) greater improvement in hyperemia, edema, lacrimation, and blurred vision/photophobia. Patients completed daily diaries for seven symptoms. At the end of the study, comparisons to baseline between groups favored the pentigetide group for six of the seven symptoms; for itching, improvement favored significantly (ANOVA, P less than .05) the pentigetide group. The mean severity of all symptoms decreased by 64% in the pentigetide group as compared with a decrease of 46% in the cromolyn sodium group. Adverse experiences were minor and comparable in both groups. No clinically abnormal changes were noted for visual acuity, intraocular pressure, or common laboratory tests. This double-blind, active-controlled trial demonstrates that pentigetide, 0.5%, ophthalmic solution is safe and effective in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis.
 ...
PMID:Double-blind trial of pentigetide ophthalmic solution, 0.5%, compared with cromolyn sodium, 4%, ophthalmic solution for allergic conjunctivitis. 190 16

As paclitaxel may induce positive spontaneous visual symptoms or persistent visual loss, we carried out this electrophysiological study in an attempt to clarify the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms of visual pathway involvement. The study involved 30 breast cancer patients: 14 were treated with paclitaxel alone (group A) and 16 with paclitaxel and adriamycin (group B). Pattern visual evoked potentials (VEPs), and transient, 30 Hz flicker (FLK) and oscillatory potential (OP) white flash electroretinograms (ERGs), were recorded before treatment, after the third and sixth therapeutic cycle, and at the end of the programmed regimen. Pretreatment: Abnormal VEP and OP and FLK changes occurred more than 75% of patients; transient ERGs were normal in more than 90%. Serial recordings: VEPs remained unchanged in both goups. In group A, ERG b-wave latency significantly increased (ANOVA P<0.005), and OP and FLK were characterised by non-significant mild attenuation. Several combinations of ERG, OP, FLK and VEP changes occurred in 50% of the patients. The association between transitory lightining scotoma or blurred vision (reported by 12 patients) and VEP, ERG and FLK was poor, whereas that with OP was satisfactory. A few patients showed stable and persistent subclinical electrophysiological changes. Electrophysiological changes during treatment revealed the involvement of both the retina and anterior optic pathway. There was only a weak correlation between visual symptoms and electrophysiology. We suggest that the most likely mechanism of visual symptoms and electrophysiological changes during paclitaxel administration is vascular dysregulation in the retina, or ischemic mechanisms when the optic nerve is involved.
 ...
PMID:Electrophysiological evaluation of visual pathways in paclitaxel-treated patients. 1613 28