ライフサイエンスコーパス: drug reaction

1 f hepatocytes, consistent with a cholestatic drug reaction.

2 y and herpesviruses in mediating the adverse drug reaction.

3 e (aLQTS) is a serious unpredictable adverse drug reaction.

4 lation via MRGPRX2 and causes pseudoallergic drug reaction.

5 se remission or the occurrence of an adverse drug reaction.

6 ing a rare, potentially fatal, T-cell-driven drug reaction.

7 ory or poor risk assessment of recurrence of drug reaction.

8 o the pathophysiology of this severe adverse drug reaction.

9 considering the increased tremor and adverse drug reactions.

10 variates that influenced the rate of adverse drug reactions.

11 nor, and potentially iatrogenic; and adverse drug reactions.

12 t specific HLA alleles influence the risk of drug reactions.

13 rine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) and adverse drug reactions.

14 tudies advanced the understanding of adverse drug reactions.

15 ils of 10 and 3 reports of suspected adverse drug reactions.

16 e from the eruptions usually associated with drug reactions.

17 g metabolism and have been linked to adverse drug reactions.

18 istance to pathogens and the risk of adverse drug reactions.

19 acotherapy whereas others experience adverse drug reactions.

20 that may underlie susceptibility to adverse drug reactions.

21 metabolites may be involved in idiosyncratic drug reactions.

22 nalysis linking chemical features to adverse drug reactions.

23 bited by variable drug responses and adverse drug reactions.

24 ding compounds is essential to avoid adverse drug reactions.

25 acokinetics, treatment efficacy, and adverse drug reactions.

26 a common target of inflammation and adverse drug reactions.

27 ntibiotic resistance and unnecessary adverse drug reactions.

28 nd reduce the number and severity of adverse drug reactions.

29 and hospital nurses in reporting of adverse drug reactions.

30 distinguish from cytomegalovirus disease or drug reactions.

31 involved in other serious cutaneous adverse drug reactions.

32 annot account for most idiosyncratic adverse drug reactions.

33 histologic changes commonly associated with drug reactions.

34 information on the risks of serious adverse drug reactions.

35 levels, CD4+ lymphocyte counts, and adverse drug reactions.

36 national normalized ratio (INR), and adverse drug reactions.

37 esponses, and cause life-threatening adverse drug reactions.

38 emerging research identifies various adverse drug reactions.

39 nteractions account for up to 30% of adverse drug reactions.

40 o serum from patients with cutaneous adverse drug reactions.

41 ferences in therapeutic efficacy and adverse drug reactions.

42 ers or therapeutic targets for these adverse drug reactions.

43 reported all AEs, as opposed to only adverse drug reactions.

44 diverse populations in the study of adverse drug reactions.

45 and are at higher risk of developing adverse drug reactions.

46 used to measure costs to treat these adverse drug reactions.

47 erapy without increasing the risk of adverse drug reactions.

48 ne interindividual susceptibility to adverse drug reactions.

49 ased screening assays for testing individual drug reactions.

50 ose existing drugs and identify rare adverse drug reactions.

51 le focussed on HLA associations with adverse drug reactions.

52 r both predictable ADRs and hypersensitivity drug reactions.

53 ns most commonly involved in serious adverse drug reactions.

54 r serious drug-drug interactions and adverse drug reactions.

55 ce system was put in place to detect adverse drug reactions.

56 t of grade 3 or higher, including 15 adverse drug reactions (11 hepatic events, all but 2 of which oc

57 or additional drug therapy (31%) and adverse drug reactions (18%) being the most common problems iden

58 n the Text Analysis Conference (TAC) Adverse Drug Reaction 2017 challenge test data set, consisting o

59 We recorded no serious adverse drug reactions; 28 adverse events, most commonly nausea,

60 HF (11 paracetamol overdose, 2 idiosyncratic drug reaction, 3 Wilson's disease) were available.

61 cidences of adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions (33%) were low, no serious AEs were study

62 cidences of adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions (33%) were low, no serious AEs were study

63 without any increase in incidence of adverse drug reactions (4% vs 3%; P = .4).

64 % for ST-Cefaz) and highest rates of adverse drug reactions (5.2% vs 4.6% for Hx-Cefaz and 4.7% for S

65 Ritonavir was associated with adverse drug reactions about twice as frequently as indinavir or

66 ulitis-mimicking oncologic adverse cutaneous drug reactions (ACDRs), pseudocellulitis may be difficul

67 ng to clinical efficacy, inefficacy, adverse drug reaction (ADR), and other medical causes.

68 k of short- (9%) and long-term (30%) adverse drug reaction (ADR); (2) an 80-year-old woman with low r

69 Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) accounted for the majority of drug

70 Two spontaneously reported serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and 32 spontaneously reported nons

71 score (TCRS), adverse events (AEs), adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and immunological response (IgE, I

72 es identifying HLA associations with adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and one for the examination of inf

73 Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a central consideration during

74 Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a common cause of attrition in

75 Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a relatively common cause of m

76 Immune-mediated (IM) adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are an underrecognized source of p

77 Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are commonplace and occur when a d

78 Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) are of great public health concern

79 Idiosyncratic adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are one of the most common causes

80 the study was to investigate whether adverse drug reactions (ADRs) during immunotherapy with a grass

81 Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) harm patients and are costly for h

82 portant tool for predicting clinical adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of investigational drugs.

83 te the impact of self-reported NSAID adverse drug reactions (ADRs) on risk of OUD, adjusting for othe

84 Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) pose critical public health issues

85 est (AESIs), serious AEs (SAEs), and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reported during postinjection visi

86 Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) requiring closer monitoring or cha

87 be more likely to have unrecognized adverse drug reactions (ADRs) than established drugs, but no rec

88 the one-strength regimen caused more adverse drug reactions (ADRs) than the Standard regimen (p = .04

89 neous reports do not reliably detect adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that occur widely separated in tim

90 pharmaceutical companies can report adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to pharmacovigilance databases.

91 Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to tuberculosis (TB) medications m

92 ify whether phenotypes indicative of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were enriched in drug-exposed indi

93 ntion and 0.1% (23) death related to adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were reported.

94 n older adults increases the risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), but studying this relationship is

95 t carbamazepine 1 is associated with adverse drug reactions (ADRs), including hepatotoxicity; oxidati

96 of 14% of patients experienced minor adverse drug reactions (ADRs), of which 2 cases demonstrated fla

97 ) participants experienced 1 or more adverse drug reactions (ADRs), of which 38 (10.5%) and 98 (27.1%

98 Use of medication can cause adverse drug reactions (ADRs), unwanted or unexpected events, wh

99 ephalosporin or incidence of serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs).

100 the incidence and timing of onset of adverse drug reactions (ADRs).

101 that monitors, detects, and prevents adverse drug reactions (ADRs).

102 these are associated with a risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs).

103 e classified by the investigators as adverse drug reactions (ADRs).

104 thiopurine therapy because of severe adverse drug reactions (ADRs); leukopenia is one of the most ser

105 nization's (WHO) global database for adverse drug reactions, ADRs, VigiAccess.

106 fy key terms, such as adverse event, adverse drug reaction, adverse drug event, medication error, and

107 s DILI cases reported to the Swedish Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee (1970-2004) for any si

108 patient susceptibility to developing adverse drug reactions, although the underlying mechanism is not

109 anism of undesirable drug effects or adverse drug reactions among those compounds, we examined their

110 ge) between the identification of an adverse drug reaction and the subsequent onset of drug-induced i

111 Collection of adverse drug reactions and anticancer activity attributable to t

112 that are commonly seen with both historical drug reactions and during drug challenges, and it would

113 DDIs are an important cause of adverse drug reactions and exact a large toll on the health care

114 e employed with caution for risk of systemic drug reactions and hypertensive events in middle-aged an

115 , a failure to routinely incorporate adverse drug reactions and serum metabolite monitoring in study

116 The occurrence of adverse drug reactions and somnolence were observed in 19.7% and

117 Thiopurine-related adverse drug reactions and thiopurine failure are frequent.

118 toms mimicking more common, entities such as drug reactions and viral syndromes.

119 the incidence of clinically relevant adverse drug reactions and was feasible across diverse European

120 he liver adapts to fasting, adverse diabetes drug reactions, and cancer.

121 used to assess treatment completion, adverse drug reactions, and factors associated with treatment di

122 ngth of stay, additional procedures, adverse drug reactions, and hospital-acquired infections.

123 uous drugs, polypharmacology-related adverse drug reactions, and multi-drug therapies, especially can

124 Xerosis, drug reactions, and neuropathy should be considered when

125 Adverse drug reactions are a frequent culprit.

126 Adverse drug reactions are a significant cause of morbidity and

127 Adverse drug reactions are a significant public health problem t

128 tionally, contact dermatitis, urticaria, and drug reactions are addressed in this review.

129 eatment failure due to resistance or adverse drug reactions are common, asking for new therapeutic st

130 Although many adverse drug reactions are considered nonpreventable, recent dev

131 Immune-mediated type IV adverse drug reactions are idiosyncratic in nature, generally no

132 Schemes for spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions are important to post-marketing safety su

133 Incidents of adverse cardiac drug reactions are more common in patients with preexist

134 Idiosyncratic adverse drug reactions are unpredictable, dose-independent and p

135 ach to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole adverse drug reaction assessment and rechallenge to optimize pro

136 Three adverse drug reaction assessment instruments were used to determ

137 e was to determine the prevalence of adverse drug reactions associated with off-label use and evaluat

138 ating that doctors should report all adverse drug reactions associated with them to the Committee on

139 iscontinuation of treatment owing to adverse drug reactions) associated with amitriptyline (off-label

140 To improve the detection of adverse drug reactions at our hospital, we utilized electronic m

141 ypes can range from life-threatening adverse drugs reactions at one end of the spectrum to equally se

142 te adenovirus infections or systemic adverse drug reactions, but levels in patients with KD were not

143 studied in other types of cutaneous adverse drug reactions (cADRs).

144 Rarely a drug reaction can affect both organs concurrently.

145 s that increase the risk of life-threatening drug reactions can be clinically silent before drug expo

146 A total of 37,848 dupilumab adverse drug reaction cases were reported, with skin, eye, and m

147 ed thrombocytopenia, a prothrombotic adverse drug reaction caused by immunoglobulin G directed agains

148 e in three market withdrawals due to adverse drug reactions, causing preventable human suffering and

149 rmal necrolysis are severe adverse cutaneous drug reactions characterized by widespread skin and muco

150 Baseline and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug reaction clinical data were correlated with cell ch

151 risk of presenting with a cutaneous adverse drug reaction compared with non-sulfonamides and that me

152 tify and characterize cardiovascular adverse drug reactions (CV-ADR) associated with ibrutinib.

153 ts are derived mainly from voluntary adverse drug reaction databases, they might be prone to reportin

154 ug levels, which are associated with adverse drug reactions, delayed treatment response, and relapse.

155 d evidence of a systemic or life-threatening drug reaction, developed a systemic drug eruption, or ha

156 and the number of harmful and severe adverse drug reactions did not differ for medications used for F

157 Although adverse drug reactions do not occur more frequently with off-lab

158 had 48 trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole adverse drug reactions documented either at baseline or during t

159 Tremor rates and adverse drug reactions favoured the placebo group.

160 ence for a genetic predisposition to adverse drug reactions, focusing on gene variants producing alte

161 The number of adverse drug reactions for medications administered and the numb

162 dications that are associated with lichenoid drug reactions; four patients were postmenopausal; and a

163 graphics, costs, outcomes (including adverse drug reactions, functional status, ventilator time in ho

164 Patients with cutaneous drug-reaction had higher proportion of eosinophilia duri

165 Hypersensitivity drug reactions (HDRs) represent a large and important he

166 ommon medicines involved in hypersensitivity drug reactions (HDRs) to NSAIDs, no patient series studi

167 telets, leading to the prothrombotic adverse drug reaction heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT).

168 e associated with an immune-mediated adverse drug reaction, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.

169 ause of anaphylaxis in a small percentage of drug reactions; however, diagnosis of PEG allergy is com

170 Idiosyncratic adverse drug reactions (IADRs) encompass a diverse group of toxi

171 ve metabolites in many idiosyncratic adverse drug reactions (IADRs).

172 ntipsychotic treatment by preventing adverse drug reactions, improving treatment efficacy or relievin

173 nto the molecular mechanisms of this adverse drug reaction in adult patients with germ cell testicula

174 are but potentially life-threatening adverse drug reaction in patients receiving angiotensin-converti

175 7; P = .0001), with no recurrence of adverse drug reactions in 74%.

176 a risk factor for the development of adverse drug reactions in an adult ICU population.

177 a novel method to better investigate adverse drug reactions in chemical space.

178 Adverse drug reactions in children are an important public healt

179 sting does not predict some forms of adverse drug reactions in humans.

180 lpful in identification of potential adverse drug reactions in mono as well as combination therapy re

181 nce techniques to reduce the risk of adverse drug reactions in patients receiving warfarin.

182 ated to calculate incidence rates of adverse drug reactions in the community from spontaneous reports

183 group) or amiodarone side effects or adverse drug reactions (in the rhythm-control group).

184 orter genes previously implicated in adverse drug reactions including simvastatin-induced myopathy an

185 Adverse drug reactions, including severe patient bleeding, may o

186 lly involved in dupilumab-associated adverse drug reactions, including the fibroblast GF receptor (in

187 It was found that the rate of adverse drug reactions increases by 8% for every one additional

188 Differential diagnosis includes drug reactions, infections, graft-versus-host disease (G

189 variety of manifestations, including adverse drug reactions, inflammatory conditions, bacterial immun

190 idermal necrolysis (TEN) is a severe adverse drug reaction involving extensive keratinocyte death in

191 Potential hepatic adverse drug reaction is a safety concern associated with the us

192 nintended 'off-targets' that predict adverse drug reactions is daunting by empirical methods alone.

193 nintended 'off-targets' that predict adverse drug reactions, is a daunting task by experimental appro

194 t, yet its use is limited by several adverse drug reactions, known as cisplatin-induced toxicities (C

195 ed cardiotoxicity (ACT) is a serious adverse drug reaction limiting anthracycline use and causing sub

196 One risk factor for adverse drug reactions may be age.

197 enal transplant recipients, reported adverse drug reactions may limit use and increase reliance on co

198 Adverse drug reactions, morning peak flow (mPEF) and asthma symp

199 anation for HLA-linked idiosyncratic adverse drug reactions, namely that drugs can alter the repertoi

200 a given drug, creating a drug-target-adverse drug reaction network.

201 parathyroid hormone, the most common adverse drug reactions (No./total No.) were nausea (iron isomalt

202 drug (n=1558), a clinically relevant adverse drug reaction occurred in 152 (21.0%) of 725 patients in

203 no life-threatening severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions occurred, and the decision for drug thera

204 is/granulocytopenia (CIAG), a severe adverse drug reaction occurring in up to 1% of treated individua

205 induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an adverse drug reaction occurring in up to 5% of patients exposed

206 is a relatively common prothrombotic adverse drug reaction of unusual pathogenesis that features plat

207 By integrating data sources about adverse drug reactions of drugs with an established cheminformat

208 2 reactions are more likely to be immediate drug reactions of moderate severity.

209 g the lack of therapeutic benefit or adverse drug reactions of PGx targeted drugs.

210 tevens-Johnson syndrome are severe cutaneous drug reactions of unknown mechanism.

211 nduced taste disturbance is a common adverse drug reaction often triggered by drug secretion into sal

212 on of drug use because of concern for severe drug reaction or incorrect presumption of disease relaps

213 These events might be responsible for drug reactions or development of certain diseases.

214 enhance drug metabolism (leading to adverse drug reactions) or inhibit inflammation.

215 ns (P = .059); 78.3% and 45.2% had 1 adverse drug reactions (P < .001); and post-treatment QFT conver

216 9H groups, respectively, developed systemic drug reactions (P = .059); 78.3% and 45.2% had 1 adverse

217 nd patient-reported clinical events, adverse drug reactions, patient quality of life (EQ-5D-5L) and h

218 Secondary outcomes included adverse drug reaction, PICC line complication, and a composite o

219 armacogenomic Testing for Preventing Adverse Drug Reactions (PREPARE), a multicenter, controlled, ope

220 uisition cost, and costs of treating adverse drug reactions probably or possibly related to study dru

221 involving AAD can result in serious adverse drug reactions ranging from arrhythmia recurrence, failu

222 s of clinicians on the spectrum of cutaneous drug reaction related to entecavir therapy.

223 Three subjects reported mild adverse drug reactions related to FCM; two of these were conside

224 Our institutional adverse drug reaction reporting program was used to identify any

225 When drug reactions resembling allergy occur, they are called

226 associated with allergic and pseudoallergic drug reactions, respectively.

227 d to determine the probability of an adverse drug reaction resulting from drug therapy.

228 ons during hypothermia and increased adverse drug reaction risk complicates concurrent pharmacotherap

229 s with the strongest associations to adverse drug reaction risk in the intensive care unit are presen

230 more frequently with off-label use, adverse drug reaction risk increases with each additional off-la

231 other outcomes, including nonserious adverse drug reactions (RR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.58-1.46]), injurious

232 quently discovered to have suspected adverse drug reactions (SADRs).

233 Adverse drug reaction screens in a kidney panel revealed no off-

234 e identified clinically significant systemic drug reactions (SDR) and evaluated risk factors in patie

235 cent advances in pharmacogenetics of adverse drug reactions show promise, the small size of the popul

236 literature documenting the risk for adverse drug reactions specific to bleeding and/or clotting with

237 We included 18 of 333 adverse drug reaction studies and 22 of 61 variant allele review

238 ochondrial DNA (mtDNA) variation and adverse drug reactions such as idiosyncratic drug-induced liver

239 st cause of life-threatening immune-mediated drug reactions that are considered off-target, including

240 n of the role that genetics plays in adverse drug reactions that are either predictable extensions of

241 ve of pharmacovigilance is to detect adverse drug reactions that are unknown or novel in terms of the

242 reactions are common clinical acute adverse drug reactions that can exacerbate a patient's condition

243 ole of the adaptive immune system in adverse drug reactions that target the liver has not been define

244 th Organization's classification for adverse drug reactions, the association between bortezomib use a

245 In an effort to prevent adverse drug reactions, the FDA mandates the evaluation of the p

246 ssed daily for the development of an adverse drug reaction through active surveillance.

247 thy should be recognized as an idiosyncratic drug reaction to many NSAIDS.

248 s any clinical event described as an adverse drug reaction to one or more drugs.

249 lly lethal, immunologically mediated adverse drug reaction to unfractionated heparin or, less commonl

250 cholesterol levels that could cause adverse drug reactions to cholesterol-lowering drugs such as sta

251 that may be associated with the rare adverse drug reaction torsades de pointes.

252 rescribe include present or expected adverse drug reactions, unnecessary polypharmacy, and the need t

253 find associations between drugs and adverse drug reactions using disproportionate Bayesian-reporting

254 ing concern over potentially serious adverse drug reactions warrants an evaluation of post marketing

255 2 clinical and/or grade 3 laboratory adverse drug reaction was reported, leading to delayed therapy a

256 The incidence of adverse drug reactions was 9.4% (5 of 53), and all of the advers

257 Severity and harm of the adverse drug reaction were also assessed.

258 Rates of adverse drug reaction were low (<4% in both groups) but slightly

259 rce utilization associated with each adverse drug reaction were used to measure costs to treat these

260 SSG/PM efficacies were similar, and adverse drug reactions were as expected given the drugs safety p

261 One hundred and sixteen adverse drug reactions were categorized dichotomously (Food and

262 The incidence and severity of other adverse drug reactions were comparable between the 2 groups.

263 Unexpected adverse drug reactions were found in the "intestinal obstruction

264 Adverse drug reactions were less common in the TMP-SMX plus plac

265 Discontinuations due to adverse drug reactions were lowest for TDF+FTC+RAL (1.9%; 95% CI

266 s was 9.4% (5 of 53), and all of the adverse drug reactions were mild.

267 The most common adverse drug reactions were ocular side effects, including hyper

268 tions was 3.2% in the intravenous group, and drug reactions were rare in both groups (intravenous: 0.

269 Three adverse drug reactions were regarded as both serious and unexpec

270 Adverse drug reactions were reported by 1174 (35.7%) patients, o

271 Adverse drug reactions were reported by 30.6% of patients; 5.2%

272 ) of 51 events classified as serious adverse drug reactions were reported.

273 No serious adverse drug reactions were reported.

274 but no suspected unexpected serious adverse drug reactions were seen.

275 airs (305 associated with at least 1 adverse drug reaction) were reported.

276 ociated with serious T cell-mediated adverse drug reactions, which has led to preventive screening st

277 occus aureus sinusitis, and multiple adverse drug reactions whose T cells were unable to produce IFN-

278 enetic variants associated with this adverse drug reaction will further our mechanistic understanding

279 es virus (HHV) reactivation is well known in drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptom (DR

280 Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome/drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (D

281 is a major mechanism in the pathogenesis of drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (D

282 often severe DHR and started in 14/25 with a drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (D

283 vens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS), and 11 cases of Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (D

284 uses (HHVs) contribute to the development of drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (D

285 added significantly to our understanding of drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (D

286 and toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN) and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (D

287 Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (D

288 Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (D

289 Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (D

290 ause of the severe hypersensitivity syndrome drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (D

291 Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (D

292 Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (D

293 ersensitivity syndrome (DIHS), also known as drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (D

294 One serious case of drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms oc

295 In the drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms su

296 ar to the more severe eczema vaccinatum, and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms sy

297 DRs, such as drug hypersensitivity syndrome, drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms sy

298 HLA class I associations with SJS/TEN and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms/dr

299 ions are suggestive of a potential immediate drug reaction with mild symptoms.

300 Less than 1% of women reported adverse drug reactions, with no increase in HIV-positive women o