• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

新型抗组胺药EGYT-2062(司他斯汀)的两阶段临床药理学对比试验

Comparative two-phase clinicopharmacological trial of a new antihistaminic, EGYT-2062, setastine.

作者信息

Vezekényi Z, Zolnai K, Nagy L

机构信息

First Department of Medicine, University Medical School, Pécs, Hungary.

出版信息

Acta Med Hung. 1987;44(1):55-64.

PMID:2890137
Abstract

During the two-phase clinicopharmacological trial in humans of a new antihistaminic compound EGYT-2062, setastine developed by EGIS Pharmaceutical Company, Budapest, was tested the tolerance to the drug, its pharmacodynamic effect by i. c. histamine and acetylcholine tests, and its effect on the CNS by neuropsychiatric examination on eight healthy volunteers. The side-effects appearing during treatment were recorded. A self-controlled blind study was performed. The reference compound was clemastine. Based on the results, for prolonged use a dose of 2 mg three times/day (t.i.d.) is recommended. The antihistaminic effect of setastine almost equalled that of clemastine given in a dose of 1 mg t.i.d., while its antiacetylcholine effect exceeded it, and in view of its few psychic side-effects, might be tolerated better than clemastine.

摘要

在一项针对新型抗组胺化合物EGYT - 2062(由布达佩斯的EGIS制药公司研发的司他斯汀)进行的人体两阶段临床药理学试验中,对8名健康志愿者测试了该药的耐受性、通过皮内注射组胺和乙酰胆碱试验检测其药效学作用,以及通过神经精神检查评估其对中枢神经系统的影响。记录了治疗期间出现的副作用。进行了一项自身对照的盲法研究。对照化合物为氯马斯汀。根据结果,建议长期使用时剂量为每日三次,每次2毫克(t.i.d.)。司他斯汀的抗组胺作用几乎等同于每日三次给予1毫克氯马斯汀的效果,但其抗乙酰胆碱作用超过了氯马斯汀,并且鉴于其精神方面的副作用较少,可能比氯马斯汀更易于耐受。

相似文献

1
Comparative two-phase clinicopharmacological trial of a new antihistaminic, EGYT-2062, setastine.新型抗组胺药EGYT-2062(司他斯汀)的两阶段临床药理学对比试验
Acta Med Hung. 1987;44(1):55-64.
2
Pharmacology of the new H1-receptor antagonist setastine hydrochloride.
Arzneimittelforschung. 1990 Dec;40(12):1340-5.
3
A comparison of antihistaminic and sedative effects of some H1-receptor antagonists.某些H1受体拮抗剂的抗组胺和镇静作用比较。
Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh). 1985;114:155-6. doi: 10.2340/00015555114155156.
4
Neuropsychologic and cardiovascular effects of clemastine fumarate under pressure.富马酸氯马斯汀在压力状态下的神经心理学及心血管效应
Undersea Hyperb Med. 1995 Dec;22(4):401-6.
5
Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of mizolastine in healthy volunteers with an indirect response model.采用间接反应模型对健康志愿者中咪唑斯汀的药代动力学和药效动力学建模。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2000 Dec;68(6):647-57. doi: 10.1067/mcp.2000.112341.
6
Comparison of peripheral and central effects of single and repeated oral dose administrations of bilastine, a new H1 antihistamine: a dose-range study in healthy volunteers with hydroxyzine and placebo as control treatments.新型H1抗组胺药比拉斯汀单次及重复口服给药的外周和中枢效应比较:以羟嗪和安慰剂作为对照治疗的健康志愿者剂量范围研究
J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008 Dec;28(6):675-85. doi: 10.1097/JCP.0b013e31818b2091.
7
Comparative study of the efficacy and tolerance of terfenadine and clemastine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.特非那定与氯马斯汀治疗季节性变应性鼻炎的疗效和耐受性比较研究
Arzneimittelforschung. 1982;32(9a):1211-3.
8
Inhibition of mast cell degranulation-induced drop of blood pressure with clemastine, cromolyn and compound 48/80 pretreatment.用氯马斯汀、色甘酸和48/80化合物预处理抑制肥大细胞脱颗粒诱导的血压下降。
Inflamm Res. 2006 Apr;55 Suppl 1:S07-8. doi: 10.1007/s00011-005-0016-2.
9
Assessing the sedative (adverse) effects of antiallergic drugs by quantitative electroencephalography: effects of setastine a non-sedating antihistaminic drug.通过定量脑电图评估抗组胺药的镇静(不良)作用:非镇静性抗组胺药西替利嗪的作用
Ther Hung. 1994;42(1):14-20.
10
Effects of mizolastine and clemastine on actual driving and psychomotor performance in healthy volunteers.咪唑斯汀和氯马斯汀对健康志愿者实际驾驶及精神运动表现的影响。
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1994;47(3):253-9. doi: 10.1007/BF02570505.

引用本文的文献

1
The antihistamines of the nineties.九十年代的抗组胺药。
Clin Rev Allergy. 1993 Spring;11(1):111-53. doi: 10.1007/BF02802296.