Case report: Kaposi's sarcoma: an unusual presentation.

Kaposi's sarcoma (KS) is the most common tumor associated with HIV-1 infection, affecting 30% of HIV-infected homosexual men before the advent of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). In the era of HAART, the incidence of KS has markedly declined. KS usually presents with cutaneous lesions, but it may involve other organs, most commonly the pulmonary and gastrointestinal systems. Isolated pulmonary KS without cutaneous involvement is rare, although intrathoracic KS is seen in up to 75% of patients with KS. We describe an unusual case of a patient with AIDS and isolated endobronchial KS despite a normal arterial pO2, normal pulmonary function tests, no cutaneous KS, and normal chest computed tomographic findings.

Tolerability of enteric-coated didanosine capsules compared with didanosine tablets in adults with HIV infection.

BACKGROUND: A new enteric-coated (EC) didanosine (ddI) formulation (Videx EC; Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, U.S.A.) may be better tolerated than the tablet form because it lacks the buffer component thought to be responsible for diarrhea and other gastrointestinal (GI) side effects. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the frequency and magnitude of GI side effects (nausea, bloating, GI upset, diarrhea, abdominal cramps, gas [flatus]) before and after switching the formulation of ddI, in study subjects who were experiencing one or more GI symptom(s) of at least moderate severity. METHODS: A 6-week open label crossover study of current didanosine tablet users comparing daily symptom scores (7 point scale, 0 = absent to 6 = very severe) during weeks 1 to 2 (on tablets) to weeks 4 and 6 (on EC capsules). Formulation palatability and preference, lifestyle effects, and use of antidiarrheals or other medications for symptom relief were also assessed. RESULTS: GI symptom scores (7-day means) on tablets were diarrhea 2.11, gas 2.00, bloating 1.23, abdominal cramps 0.74, GI upset 0.69, nausea 0.66. After switching to EC (week 4 and week 6), mean scores decreased for diarrhea (mean scores 0.99 week 4, 0.79 week 6), gas (0.95, 0.79), bloating (0.49, 0.32), abdominal cramps (0.21, 0.05), GI upset (0.16, 0.14), and nausea (0.32, 0.22). Severity of all GI symptoms was significantly reduced after 4 weeks on EC capsules ( p <.01 by paired t- test). Negative impact of side effects on routine activities was significantly reduced (41% on tablet vs. 7% on EC; p <.01). All 42 study subjects preferred the EC form. CONCLUSIONS: According to patients' diary scores, switching to ddI in EC form significantly reduces nausea, bloating, GI upset, diarrhea, abdominal cramps, and gas for individuals who experienced GI side effects while taking the buffered tablet form. The striking tolerability advantages appear to support routine switching to EC for such patients and may suggest that widespread preferential selection of the EC form is appropriate to enhance didanosine tolerability and promote treatment adherence.

Adverse drug reactions-a matter of opinion.

The accurate identification of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is difficult because ADRs usually present no unique clinical or laboratory findings that demarcate them from the manifestations of concurrent illnesses. The identification of ADRs depends on the clinical assessments of physicians-sometimes the clinician treating the patient and at other times a clinical pharmacologist. Considering the complex and subjective nature of clinically identifying ADRs, how accurately are ADRs identified? To answer this question, three clinical pharmacologists each independently evaluated 60 selected cases to determine if medication, alcohol, or "recreational" drugs had caused the hospitalization. The three clinical pharmacologists agreed on only 30 cases (50%), and 27 of these were thought to be unrelated to medications. In 19 of the 30 cases about which the clinical pharmacologists disagreed, they disagreed on whether or not a medication-or alcohol-related event had occurred at all. The clinical pharmacologists disagreed with the physicians treating the patient in 22% to 37% of the cases, but because of the differences among the pharmacologists, the treating physicians agreed with at least one of them in 95% of the cases. Complete agreement between the clinical pharmacologists and the treating physicians occurred in 47% of the cases. This degree of disparity in the clinical identification of ADRs shows that the evaluation of ADRs is subjective and imprecise. The accurate identification of ADRs awaits the development of an objective technique for recognizing ADRs.

Sodium salicylamide: relative bioavailability and subjective effects.

The bioavailability of sodium salicylamide (NaSAM) in solution of salicylamide (SAM) tablets was compared in 6 healthy human volunteers. Bioavailability was assessed by plasma level determinations of nonmetabolized salicylamide (free SAM) and salicylamide plus conjugated metabolites (total SAM) for 3 hr following oral doses of 0.65, 1.30, 1.95, and 2.60 gm of salicylamide. The availability of NaSAM was found to be superior to SAM and dose-dependent. Mean peak levels of free SAM and total SAM were higher and were reached earlier after NaSAM liquid than after SAM tablets. Significantly higher mean levels of free SAM were found at the 1.95 and 2.60 gm dose levels after NaSAM administration than after SAM. Mean total SAM concentration was significantly higher after NaSAM at all dosage levels. The sedative effects of salicylamide were assessed with a self-scoring questionnaire. Sedation seemed to increase with increasing dose of both NaSAM and SAM. The sedative response occurred earlier after NaSAM than after SAM. Side effects were minor and transient in nature, occurred at the higher dosage levels, and were predominantly lightheadedness and dizziness. Because NaSAM produces higher drug levels and has a more rapid onset of subjective effects, we conclude that it represents a potentially superior dosage form.

Oral contraceptive patient information. A questionnaire study of attitudes, knowledge, and preferred information sources.

A questionnaire was designed to assess attitudes, knowledge, and views and sources of drug information on oral contraceptives, with particular attention to the role of the patient-oriented package insert. An analysis of 828 completed questionnaires shows that many women are apprehensive about the safety of oral contraceptives. The impact of the patient-oriented oral contraceptive insert on the women surveyed appears to be positive. The present labeling is read and found useful by most oral-contraceptive users. Patients were variably informed about the correct use and side effects discussed in current labeling, suggesting a need for improved transmission of important drug information. Patients preferred information from health professionals and printed sources over media sources. Balanced label information about risks of oral contraceptives should be made available to improve the likelihood of sound risk-benefit judgments.