出版者
福島県史学会
巻号頁・発行日
1951
著者
五十嵐 久佳
出版者
日本神経治療学会
雑誌
神経治療学 (ISSN:09168443)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.36, no.3, pp.229-232, 2019 (Released:2019-11-25)
参考文献数
24

Both of chronic migraine (CM) and medication–overuse headache (MOH) are common neurological diseases. They have a great detrimental influence on a patient's life, with a severe impact on socioeconomic functioning and quality of life.One of the most common causes of migraine chronification is acute medication overuse. On the other hand, MOH is an interaction between a therapeutic agent used excessively and a susceptible patient. Among those with a previous primary headache diagnosis, about 80% of MOH patients have migraine.All patients with CM should be considered for pharmacological prophylaxis, and the behavioral aspects of therapy should be emphasized. The two prophylactic drugs with the best evidence for efficacy in CM are topiramate and onabotulinumtoxinA. But these therapies currently have not been covered by health insurance in Japan. The options to treat patients with CM are valproic acid, propranolol, lomerizine and amitriptyline. The treatment principles for MOH are : (1) discontinue the overused medication, (2) treat the headache after discontinuing the overused medication, and (3) administer prophylactic medications. Clinical evidence shows that the majority of patients with MOH improve after discontinuation of the overused medication, as does their responsiveness to preventative treatment. Simple advice on the causes and consequences of MOH is an essential part of its management and can be provided with success. Initiation of prophylactic medications at the time of withdrawal or even before withdrawal of overused medications is recommended. Since most of the MOH patients have migraine prior to MOH, valproic acid, lomerizine, propranolol, amitriptyline may be considered as prophylactic medications. As for prognosis, the relapse rate is approximately 30%. Even after discontinuation, patients should be given suitable counseling, and headache diary should be used to confirm the frequency of using triptans, ergotamine and analgesics.
著者
ロレンス 著
出版者
講談社
巻号頁・発行日
1966

アラブ独立の偉人をその著作「ちえの七柱」等に基づき紹介。 (日本図書館協会)

7 0 0 0 旅日記

著者
細江逸記 著
出版者
篠崎書林
巻号頁・発行日
1951

7 0 0 0 OA 登録馬名簿

出版者
日本競馬会
巻号頁・発行日
vol.昭和14年7月末現在, 1939

7 0 0 0 OA 食道楽

著者
村井弦斎 著
出版者
報知社
巻号頁・発行日
vol.続編 夏の巻, 1913
著者
吉田精一 著
出版者
筑摩書房
巻号頁・発行日
vol.現代, 1958

日本の近代文学の歴史を夫々の時期や傾向を迎える代表する作家・作品を興味深く教える。 (日本図書館協会)
著者
阿波 圭介 佐藤 宏樹 堀 里子 澤田 康文
出版者
公益社団法人 日本薬学会
雑誌
YAKUGAKU ZASSHI (ISSN:00316903)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.132, no.1, pp.135-144, 2012-01-01 (Released:2012-01-01)
参考文献数
39
被引用文献数
1

Topical dermatological formulations of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are reported to show their pharmacological effect partially through the systemic circulation, and to induce systemic side effects. However, pharmaceutical equivalence and pharmacokinetic bioequivalence between brand-name and generic products are not required. Therefore, we aimed to predict systemic drug exposure from brand-name and nine generic ketoprofen tapes. In vitro release profiles were examined using the paddle-over-disk method, then analyzed by the W. I. Higuchi equation incorporating an initial burst effect. Pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated from observed release profiles and the reported time-plasma concentration profile of the brand-name product. Plasma concentration profiles of generic products were predicted from the observed release profiles and the pharmacokinetic parameters of the brand-name product. In vitro release profiles differed markedly, and estimated release rates for initial burst effect and at 24 hours ranged from 4.20 to 88.75% and from 45.27 to 95.83%, respectively. The predicted plasma concentration profile of each product reflected its release profile, and estimated Cmax ranged from 61.70 to 290.30 ng/mL (0.46- to 2.15-fold vs. brand-name product). Generic products were classified into three types, i.e., systemic exposure comparable with, higher than and lower than that of brand-name product. Cmax was predicted to increase with enhanced skin permeability for all products, but the increase rates differed among products. These results suggest that safety and efficacy differ between brand-name and generic ketoprofen tapes. Healthcare professionals should carefully monitor systemic side effects, especially when switching from brand-name to generic products for which higher systemic exposure is predicted.