...
首页> 外文期刊>Epilepsia: Journal of the International League against Epilepsy >Should enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs be considered first-line agents?
【24h】

Should enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs be considered first-line agents?

机译:是否应该诱导酶抗癫痫药物被认为是一线剂?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Despite the introduction of a host of new anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) over the last 20 years, the older agents, which are potent inducers of the cytochrome P450 (CYP450) system, remain the AEDs most commonly prescribed throughout the world. At the same time, data have gradually and continuously emerged regarding the possible adverse consequences of CYP450 induction, such that it is now appropriate to pose the question of whether the inducing drugs should still be considered first-line agents for the treatment of focal epilepsy. In this article we review the evidence suggesting that these drugs may have many detrimental metabolic effects, along with the data concerning their relative efficacy compared to the newer, noninducing AEDs. We conclude that longer and better-powered studies are needed to truly establish whether the newer AEDs are equivalent in efficacy to the older, inducing agents. Pending this, however, the extant data are sufficiently concerning to suggest that it may be prudent to start with noninducing AEDs unless there is a clear indication for one of the inducing drugs.
机译:尽管在过去20年中引入了许多新的抗癫痫药物(AEDs),但较老的药剂,即细胞色素P450(CYP450)系统的有效诱导剂,仍然是世界各地最常规定的AED。同时,数据逐渐和不断地出现了CYP450诱导的可能不良后果,使得它现在适合构成诱导药物仍然应该被视为治疗局灶性癫痫的一线药物的问题。在本文中,我们审查了证据表明这些药物可能具有许多不利的代谢效应,以及与新的非暗物AEDs相比其相对疗效的数据。我们得出结论,需要更长且更好地进行动力的研究来真正确定新的AED是否相当于较旧的诱导剂的疗效。然而,在审议这方面,现时数据足以暗示,除非存在其中一种诱导药物,否则可以谨慎地从非暗症AED开始。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号