Talk:Azithromycin

Latest comment: 3 months ago by Bgovern in topic QT Prolongation

QT Prolongation

edit

The statement about QT prolongation in the second paragraph is worded too strongly. Further, the citation given does not support the statement, as it is an evaluation of the effect of an FDA warning regarding the possibility of QT Prolongation on prescription habits.

I suggest changing the wording to "Azithromycin may increase the risk of QT prolongation, especially in elderly patients, which can lead to life-threatening arrhythmias such as torsades de pointes." with the following citation https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6204160/

Bgovern (talk) 20:24, 31 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

ClinCalc validity?

edit

Doc James The ClinCalc data for 2017 show around 12 million prescriptions for azithromycin and the CDC data show around 42 million outpatient prescriptions. Can the ClinCalc data be trusted? We use it for prescription counts for many articles.

Previous year counts from the CDC for outpatient prescriptions show 52M (2011), 53M (2012), 47M (2013), 45M (2014), 46M (2015), 44M (2016) and they are also much higher than the counts shown in the ClinCalc data.

https://clincalc.com/DrugStats/Top300Drugs.aspx

https://clincalc.com/DrugStats/Drugs/Azithromycin

https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/community/programs-measurement/state-local-activities/outpatient-antibiotic-prescriptions-US-2017.html

Whywhenwhohow (talk) 04:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Clincalc says "The data source (MEPS prescribed medicines file) is released annually by the U.S. Government. This data release represents survey data from two years prior. The ClinCalc DrugStats Database sanitizes and standardizes this data, and is typically released within a few months of the MEPS release."
Well the CDC is "Estimates created using previous IQVIA methodology" so appears to be based on data from a private company.[1]
Different methodology gets different results. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:36, 30 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Minor matter

edit

@Doc James: as busy as you are this is not very critical, but given the protected status of the article, I can only ask. (If you want to lift the protection, I for one would watch and protect from vandalism.

My observation—the appearing ref [6] Fischer, Jnos; Ganellin, C. Robin (2006). Analogue-based Drug Discovery. John Wiley & Sons. p. 498. ISBN 9783527607495, is misrepresented. The citation is to a table that only provides the structure of the drug, and no historical information on its discovery. That makes the very detailed material appearing before it subject to a {{cn|date = March 2020}}{{OR|date = March 20202}} tag. As well, when doing this edit, note, in that sentence,

"A team of researchers at the pharmaceutical company Pliva in Zagreb, SR Croatia, Yugoslavia, — Gabrijela Kobrehel, Gorjana Radobolja-Lazarevski, and Zrinka Tamburašev, led by Dr. Slobodan Đokić — discovered azithromycin in 1980.",

the amount of information looks susiciously like non-independent OR/editorializing from persons with a vested interest in recognition. At the very least, the "Dr." should come out, and the list of co-discoverers should go into a footnote, at least until it is supported by citation. In short, any discovery needs specific third-party sourcing from more than one secondary source, and this statement fails the test. I would leave it in bulk, but it needs to be reduced in detail, and it needs reliable sources. Sorry, the "le prof" in me gets angry about such scholarly sloppiness. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:19D:18DE:22D5:EC7B:7892 (talk) 19:16, 1 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

The protection was applied by User:Bradv not myself.
This book[2] listed it was patented in 1981 and that it was licensed in 1988.
Agree and adjusted. Let me know if that solves the issue. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:57, 1 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Who removed that Pliva is from Croatia?

edit

Why do you keep removing that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by It is I, Marija, a humble thief (talkcontribs) 16:49, 21 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

This is the history section of Viagra. It lists the location of where it was invented and gives the actual name of the researcher, so why can't we have the same thing? The editing on Wikipedia is not consistent and that's what pisses me off about this - if every history section removed the country I'd be ok with it, but no, all the Western country ones have stayed behind.

History

Sildenafil (compound UK-92,480) was synthesized by a group of pharmaceutical chemists working at Pfizer's Sandwich, Kent, research facility in England. It was initially studied for use in hypertension (high blood pressure) and angina pectoris (a symptom of ischaemic heart disease). The first clinical trials were conducted in Morriston Hospital in Swansea.[46] Phase I clinical trials under the direction of Ian Osterloh suggested the drug had little effect on angina, but it could induce marked penile erections.[47][48] — Preceding unsigned comment added by It is I, Marija, a humble thief (talkcontribs) 17:21, 21 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

EDIT AGAIN

I'm re-adding the history of it, because the history of Viagra is still there, so either remove both histories or keep ours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by It is I, Marija, a humble thief (talkcontribs) 21:21, 21 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

EDIT AGAIN JUNE 25TH, 2020

I'm re-adding the history with a reference. Someone removed it again for "not having a reference". I think I made a mistake in the reference though because it's missing a "title" and I'm not sure how to add that. The reference does provide a link to a website, so if someone wants to add a "title", please do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by It is I, Marija, a humble thief (talkcontribs) 22:51, 25 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

In keeping with Wikipedia's naming standards, in 1980, Pliva was a Yugoslavian state-operated pharmaceutical company. Historiaantiqua (talk) 05:30, 31 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Medical Uses

edit

In Australia, it is also used as the antibiotic of choice to treat Whooping Cough and mycoplasma infections in children. 2001:8003:E40F:9601:F020:3645:C8DA:5253 (talk) 11:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply