No abstract

Page 428:Page 429:The units for Cmax and AVC quoted in lines 5 to 7 of the Pharmacokinetic Properties section should read "giL, "giL, h rather than mg/L and mg/L' h, respectively.Since the concentration of I mg/L is supra therapeutic, the comment included in parentheses in the final sentence '(i.e. an achievable plasma concentration), on page 423 is no longer applicable and should be deleted.The values 1.92 mg/L and 16.98 mg/L in lines 5 and 6 of the right hand column should read 1.92 "giL and 16.98 "giL, respectively.The units mg/L and mg/L' h in lines 9 and 12 of the left hand column should read "giL and "giL, h, respectively.The plasma concentration units of mg/L in fig. 6 should read "giL.Vol. 40, Suppl. 3, I~: In the Round- The units for Cmax and AVC quoted in lines 5 to 7 of the Pharmacokinetic Properties section should read "giL, "giL, h rather than mg/L and mg/L' h, respectively.Since the concentration of I mg/L is supra therapeutic, the comment included in parentheses in the final sentence '(i.e. an achievable plasma concentration), on page 423 is no longer applicable and should be deleted.The values 1.92 mg/L and 16.98 mg/L in lines 5 and 6 of the right hand column should read 1.92 "giL and 16.98 "giL, respectively.The units mg/L and mg/L' h in lines 9 and 12 of the left hand column should read "giL and "giL, h, respectively.The plasma concentration units of mg/L in fig. 6 should read "giL.Vol. 40, Suppl. 3, I~: In the Round- The units for Cmax and AVC quoted in lines 5 to 7 of the Pharmacokinetic Properties section should read "giL, "giL, h rather than mg/L and mg/L' h, respectively.Since the concentration of I mg/L is supra therapeutic, the comment included in parentheses in the final sentence '(i.e. an achievable plasma concentration), on page 423 is no longer applicable and should be deleted.The values 1.92 mg/L and 16.98 mg/L in lines 5 and 6 of the right hand column should read 1.92 "giL and 16.98 "giL, respectively.The units mg/L and mg/L' h in lines 9 and 12 of the left hand column should read "giL and "giL, h, respectively.The plasma concentration units of mg/L in fig. 6 should read "giL.Vol. 40, Suppl. 3, I~: In the Round-Table Discussion on page 131, Dr R.K. Chawla's response to a question about the effect of SAMe on symptoms of schizophrenia included observations by Fazio et al. (1973). This study involved 49 depressed inpatients and 3 schizophrenics, not 49 schizophrenic patients as stated. The study reported 'positive results in over 80% of cases of depressed patients and changes in psychomotor hyperactivity in the schizophrenics'.

Mesalazine (5-aminosalicylic acid; mesalamine), the active moiety of sulphasalazine (salazosulfapyridine), is available in specially formulated oral and rectal forms for the treatment of active ulcerative colitis of mild to moderate severity and for maintenance therapy during disease remission. Tablets or capsules coated with acrylic-based resin and tablets containing microgranules coated with ethylcellulose deliver mesalazine to the distal small intestine and colon, thus avoiding the need for the carrier, sulphapyridine, which is responsible for many of the adverse effects associated with sulphasalazine. Since mesalazine is released in the small intestine from some coated preparations in contrast to sulphasalazine, these oral formulations have therapeutic potential in Crohn's disease. A limited number of therapeutic trials suggest that orally administered mesalazine 1.5 to 2.4g daily is of similar efficacy to sulphasalazine 2 to 3g daily in patients with mild to moderate ulcerative colitis. The efficacy of mesalazine enemas has been more widely investigated, a dose of 1 to 4g once daily being consistently more effective than placebo and apparently similar to enemas of prednisone 25mg or oral sulphasalazine 3g. Initial results suggest that mesalazine 4g enemas may be more effective than those containing hydrocortisone 100mg. Mesalazine and sulphasalazine in approximately equivalent oral dosages are similarly effective in maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis. Orally administered coated mesalazine is generally well tolerated by about 85% of patients allergic to or intolerant of sulphasalazine, the remainder experiencing similar reactions to both drugs. Adverse effects of mesalazine enemas are confined to local irritation and effects resulting from enema-tip insertion. Thus, orally administered coated mesalazine is a suitable alternative to sulphasalazine in the treatment of patients with mild to moderate active distal ulcerative colitis and for maintaining remission particularly in patients allergic to or intolerant of sulphasalazine. In patients who find enema therapy acceptable, mesalazine enemas are effective and well tolerated.

Diclofenac is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) advocated for use in painful and inflammatory rheumatic and certain non-rheumatic conditions. It is available in a number of administration forms which can be given orally, rectally or intramuscularly. Conveniently, dosage adjustments are not required in the elderly or in those patients with renal or hepatic impairment. The drug has a relatively short elimination half-life, which limits the potential for drug accumulation. In numerous clinical trials the efficacy of diclofenac is equivalent to that of the many newer and established NSAIDs with which it has been compared. As an analgesic it has a fast onset and long duration of action. When administered intramuscularly it is at least comparable to, and frequently superior to, many narcotic and spasmolytic combinations in renal and biliary colic. Extensive clinical experience has been gained with diclofenac, clearly establishing its safety profile. It is well tolerated compared with other NSAIDs and rarely produces gastrointestinal ulceration or other serious side effects. Thus, diclofenac can be considered as one of the few NSAIDs of 'first choice' in the treatment of acute and chronic painful and inflammatory conditions.

Terfenadine is a selective H1-histamine receptor antagonist. The lack of significant terfenadine penetration into the CNS is probably responsible for its lack of CNS effects. Terfenadine neither impairs psychomotor performance nor adversely affects subjective feelings, nor enhances the depressant effects of concomitantly administered alcohol or benzodiazepines. In controlled studies, the incidence of sedation due to terfenadine was comparable with that of placebo and significantly less than that with conventional antihistamines. Clinical studies have shown terfenadine to be comparable in efficacy with other antihistamines while being superior to placebo in alleviating the symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Additionally, there is good evidence that it is similarly as effective when used in the treatment of perennial rhinitis and histamine-mediated skin diseases. Thus, terfenadine offers a worthwhile improvement in side effect profile over 'traditional' antihistamines, and could well become an 'agent of choice' (along with other non-sedating antihistamines) in many patients in whom a histamine H1-receptor antagonist is indicated.